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;
From:   Conor Dooley <conor@kernel.org>
To:     Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>,
        Jassi Brar <jassisinghbrar@gmail.com>
Cc:     Daire McNamara <daire.mcnamara@microchip.com>,
        linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH v2 0/2] mpfs: fix handling failed service requests
Date:   Fri, 18 Nov 2022 22:20:42 +0000
Message-Id: <20221118222043.1214776-1-conor@kernel.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Precedence: bulk

From: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>

As things stand, if a service request fails, we never know about it as
the status register is not read. This is quite obviously far from ideal,
as we would be reading garbage from the mailbox if a service was to
fail.

This pair of patches adds handling of the service status to both sides
of the mailbox implementation.

@Jassi, there should be no build, or really functional, dependency here
between patches. In the failing case, the buffer is allocated by the
service driver, so things will "work" just as badly as they did before
if only one of the patches is present. As a result, should be safe to do
the mailbox patch via your tree & the client via the soc tree.

Thanks,
Conor.

Changes since v1:
- Send the patches I meant to send, with an extraneous ; removed.

Conor Dooley (2):
  soc: microchip: mpfs: handle failed system service requests
  mailbox: mpfs: read the system controller's status

 drivers/mailbox/mailbox-mpfs.c              | 31 +++++++++++++++++++--
 drivers/soc/microchip/mpfs-sys-controller.c |  6 ++++
 2 files changed, 35 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

-- 
2.37.2