Received: by 2002:a25:e7d8:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id e207csp860220ybh; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 12:26:08 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADFU+vvPNTCD6Op/zQcpW0qEM23XeOVQhyT7ZN//lIsfHvIAQbNVUE94izpsZOcxDOC6chgnSMR4 X-Received: by 2002:a05:6830:3090:: with SMTP id f16mr7400811ots.211.1584041167849; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 12:26:07 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1584041167; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=mdPZuZ2eMvAxYIr5gkCwPS/ZFoUiBsy1mzYlAOxLIegMWSdATRjbSKGDZEgflXp851 xD3YkiW5kg5IMu/44hpnGcp6pfjvdAnsWT8ye4zrmHGgfwR0By3bQjaFXmHdLrQkqtBW mXAMw6WiJTviWrVQpY89erDrVzJZszUj6CnVy3yWIy0QA/hIYr4Rv5N59aSVHg3xaLh9 n1bCsw3y71fmqfOX7UVA7ih8zcdholtpAqFb+WD5Ntwe2qqlBS9PgvPHXaqt8z3fWJXw 9Fx6JsUPa7tsbiOg1gd1AOyDnys6TnxOcX+QLYD5mdt9uG6Dwn50Df7YHpL6xFKd2q1p /V3Q== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:content-transfer-encoding :content-language:in-reply-to:mime-version:user-agent:date :message-id:from:references:cc:to:subject; bh=a101mlhVe6+AQSPz9gOf9oVBuacIY2Lw2bTfCuLxIvs=; b=rc70uC0XiFLwYpwB5cZEkB/zlyku/nIhBnQrFyXTA27Hc5QDXXqtcWlr6s7QZ4YAX4 DIhu/z568VKj16JCnMzgIZvJWjgUX/ZvqVBLE8WfHKxoVwViqJaHooTtpzfnrLzBs1N1 kAskgq215LwAFirrwfq7RDmtQfNPzkBTwxtjfmJNtUOCXjgkaZq24ur4x/OxCatiPc94 LvZqjLtdGR192hibibh47ZtU0/AwSmOY154W3wfsAXLFP73jfBbT+hHbB5TC5D79pe0J bhaRvJ1etwsGxdUew2EzgowM3a3o9XiXWYDxwhVoyw+3PG2/DylFDNtGm+PXYkd28JXk m/tg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id 66si3179842otx.151.2020.03.12.12.25.55; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 12:26:07 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726826AbgCLTYo (ORCPT + 99 others); Thu, 12 Mar 2020 15:24:44 -0400 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.110.172]:40440 "EHLO foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726594AbgCLTYo (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Mar 2020 15:24:44 -0400 Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 930EF31B; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 12:24:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.1.197.50] (e120937-lin.cambridge.arm.com [10.1.197.50]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C81523F67D; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 12:24:42 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 07/13] firmware: arm_scmi: Add notification dispatch and delivery To: Lukasz Luba , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Cc: sudeep.holla@arm.com, james.quinlan@broadcom.com, Jonathan.Cameron@Huawei.com References: <20200304162558.48836-1-cristian.marussi@arm.com> <20200304162558.48836-8-cristian.marussi@arm.com> <45d4aee9-57df-6be9-c176-cf0d03940c21@arm.com> From: Cristian Marussi Message-ID: Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2020 19:24:41 +0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.4.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 12/03/2020 14:06, Lukasz Luba wrote: > > > On 3/12/20 1:51 PM, Lukasz Luba wrote: >> Hi Cristian, >> Hi Lukasz >> just one comment below... >> >> On 3/4/20 4:25 PM, Cristian Marussi wrote: >>> Add core SCMI Notifications dispatch and delivery support logic which is >>> able, at first, to dispatch well-known received events from the RX ISR to >>> the dedicated deferred worker, and then, from there, to final deliver the >>> events to the registered users' callbacks. >>> >>> Dispatch and delivery is just added here, still not enabled. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Cristian Marussi >>> --- >>> V3 --> V4 >>> - dispatcher now handles dequeuing of events in chunks (header+payload): >>>    handling of these in_flight events let us remove one unneeded memcpy >>>    on RX interrupt path (scmi_notify) >>> - deferred dispatcher now access their own per-protocol handlers' table >>>    reducing locking contention on the RX path >>> V2 --> V3 >>> - exposing wq in sysfs via WQ_SYSFS >>> V1 --> V2 >>> - splitted out of V1 patch 04 >>> - moved from IDR maps to real HashTables to store event_handlers >>> - simplified delivery logic >>> --- >>>   drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/notify.c | 334 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- >>>   drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/notify.h |   9 + >>>   2 files changed, 342 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/notify.c >>> b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/notify.c >> >> [snip] >> >>> + >>> +/** >>> + * scmi_notify  - Queues a notification for further deferred processing >>> + * >>> + * This is called in interrupt context to queue a received event for >>> + * deferred processing. >>> + * >>> + * @handle: The handle identifying the platform instance from which the >>> + *        dispatched event is generated >>> + * @proto_id: Protocol ID >>> + * @evt_id: Event ID (msgID) >>> + * @buf: Event Message Payload (without the header) >>> + * @len: Event Message Payload size >>> + * @ts: RX Timestamp in nanoseconds (boottime) >>> + * >>> + * Return: 0 on Success >>> + */ >>> +int scmi_notify(const struct scmi_handle *handle, u8 proto_id, u8 >>> evt_id, >>> +        const void *buf, size_t len, u64 ts) >>> +{ >>> +    struct scmi_registered_event *r_evt; >>> +    struct scmi_event_header eh; >>> +    struct scmi_notify_instance *ni = handle->notify_priv; >>> + >>> +    /* Ensure atomic value is updated */ >>> +    smp_mb__before_atomic(); >>> +    if (unlikely(!atomic_read(&ni->enabled))) >>> +        return 0; >>> + >>> +    r_evt = SCMI_GET_REVT(ni, proto_id, evt_id); >>> +    if (unlikely(!r_evt)) >>> +        return -EINVAL; >>> + >>> +    if (unlikely(len > r_evt->evt->max_payld_sz)) { >>> +        pr_err("SCMI Notifications: discard badly sized message\n"); >>> +        return -EINVAL; >>> +    } >>> +    if (unlikely(kfifo_avail(&r_evt->proto->equeue.kfifo) < >>> +             sizeof(eh) + len)) { >>> +        pr_warn("SCMI Notifications: queue full dropping proto_id:%d >>> evt_id:%d  ts:%lld\n", >>> +            proto_id, evt_id, ts); >>> +        return -ENOMEM; >>> +    } >>> + >>> +    eh.timestamp = ts; >>> +    eh.evt_id = evt_id; >>> +    eh.payld_sz = len; >>> +    kfifo_in(&r_evt->proto->equeue.kfifo, &eh, sizeof(eh)); >>> +    kfifo_in(&r_evt->proto->equeue.kfifo, buf, len); >>> +    queue_work(r_evt->proto->equeue.wq, >>> +           &r_evt->proto->equeue.notify_work); >> >> Is it safe to ignore the return value from the queue_work here? > > and also from the kfifo_in > kfifo_in returns the number of effectively written bytes (using __kfifo_in), possibly capped to the effectively maximum available space in the fifo, BUT since I absolutely cannot afford to write an incomplete/truncated event into the queue, I check that in advance and backout on queue full: if (unlikely(kfifo_avail(&r_evt->proto->equeue.kfifo) < sizeof(eh) + len)) { return -ENOMEM; and given that the ISR scmi_notify() is the only possible writer on this queue I can be sure that the kfifo_in() will succeed in writing the required number of bytes after the above check...so I don't need to check the return value. Regards Cristian >> >> Regards, >> Lukasz >> >>