Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Wed, 16 Nov 2022 14:55:18 -0800
From:   Guru Das Srinagesh <quic_gurus@quicinc.com>
To:     Sibi Sankar <quic_sibis@quicinc.com>
CC:     <andersson@kernel.org>, <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org>,
        <robh+dt@kernel.org>, <agross@kernel.org>,
        <linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org>, <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
        <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <konrad.dybcio@somainline.org>,
        <robimarko@gmail.com>, <quic_rjendra@quicinc.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V4 2/2] firmware: qcom: scm: Add wait-queue handling logic
Message-ID: <20221116225518.GA14011@quicinc.com>
References: <20221114082644.28739-1-quic_sibis@quicinc.com>
 <20221114082644.28739-3-quic_sibis@quicinc.com>
 <20221115053336.GA29781@quicinc.com>
 <1b462f1a-327b-4a8f-8de7-909dbad0ddf8@quicinc.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1b462f1a-327b-4a8f-8de7-909dbad0ddf8@quicinc.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30)
Precedence: bulk

On Nov 16 2022 12:11, Sibi Sankar wrote:
> Hey Guru,
> 
> Thanks for taking time to review the series.
> 
> On 11/15/22 11:03, Guru Das Srinagesh wrote:
> >On Nov 14 2022 13:56, Sibi Sankar wrote:
> >
> >(snip)
> >
> >>+static irqreturn_t qcom_scm_irq_handler(int irq, void *data)
> >>+{
> >>+	int ret;
> >>+	struct qcom_scm *scm = data;
> >>+	struct completion *wq_to_wake;
> >>+	u32 wq_ctx, flags, more_pending = 0;
> >>+
> >>+	do {
> >>+		ret = scm_get_wq_ctx(&wq_ctx, &flags, &more_pending);
> >>+		if (ret) {
> >>+			dev_err(scm->dev, "GET_WQ_CTX SMC call failed: %d\n", ret);
> >>+			goto out;
> >>+		}
> >>+
> >>+		wq_to_wake = qcom_scm_lookup_wq(scm, wq_ctx);
> >>+		if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(wq_to_wake)) {
> >>+			dev_err(scm->dev, "No waitqueue found for wq_ctx %d: %ld\n",
> >>+				wq_ctx, PTR_ERR(wq_to_wake));
> >>+			goto out;
> >>+		}
> >>+
> >>+		if (flags != QCOM_SMC_WAITQ_FLAG_WAKE_ONE &&
> >>+		    flags != QCOM_SMC_WAITQ_FLAG_WAKE_ALL) {
> >>+			dev_err(scm->dev, "Invalid Flags found for wq_ctx: %u\n", flags);
> >>+			goto out;
> >>+		}
> >>+
> >>+		complete(wq_to_wake);
> >
> >Need to call complete() or complete_all() based on the flags.
> 
> with the current implementation we should get away with
> just complete for now but I can add them back in the way
> Bjorn wanted i.e. with the bool wake_all in the next
> re-spin.

Sounds good, let's consume the flags according to their intended purpose. 

Thank you.

Guru Das.