Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-123304-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:45e3:2400::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:45e3:2400::1;
Received-SPF: Pass (protection.outlook.com: domain of amd.com designates
 165.204.84.17 as permitted sender) receiver=protection.outlook.com;
 client-ip=165.204.84.17; helo=SATLEXMB03.amd.com; pr=C
Message-ID: <fd6ef776-d861-0dc7-2809-27868ca894e3@amd.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2024 09:49:29 -0700
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/91.11.0
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] dmaengine: xilinx: xdma: Fix synchronization issue
Content-Language: en-US
To: Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@bootlin.com>
CC: Louis Chauvet <louis.chauvet@bootlin.com>, Brian Xu <brian.xu@amd.com>,
	Raj Kumar Rampelli <raj.kumar.rampelli@amd.com>, Vinod Koul
	<vkoul@kernel.org>, Michal Simek <michal.simek@amd.com>, Jan Kuliga
	<jankul@alatek.krakow.pl>, <dmaengine@vger.kernel.org>,
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	<stable@vger.kernel.org>
References: <20240327-digigram-xdma-fixes-v1-0-45f4a52c0283@bootlin.com>
 <20240327-digigram-xdma-fixes-v1-2-45f4a52c0283@bootlin.com>
 <b59dd8cd-fd75-5342-d411-817f33e0ff48@amd.com>
 <20240328012257.4a5955f2@xps-13>
From: Lizhi Hou <lizhi.hou@amd.com>
In-Reply-To: <20240328012257.4a5955f2@xps-13>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Received-SPF: None (SATLEXMB03.amd.com: lizhi.hou@amd.com does not designate
 permitted sender hosts)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalArrivalTime: 28 Mar 2024 16:49:36.0379
 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: ff2ec159-ca4c-4536-c5aa-08dc4f470d1e
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Id: 3dd8961f-e488-4e60-8e11-a82d994e183d
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalAttributedTenantConnectingIp: TenantId=3dd8961f-e488-4e60-8e11-a82d994e183d;Ip=[165.204.84.17];Helo=[SATLEXMB03.amd.com]
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthSource:
	DS1PEPF0001709C.namprd05.prod.outlook.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthAs: Anonymous
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-FromEntityHeader: HybridOnPrem
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: CH2PR12MB4054


On 3/27/24 17:23, Miquel Raynal wrote:
> Hi Lizhi,
>
>>> @@ -376,6 +378,8 @@ static int xdma_xfer_start(struct xdma_chan *xchan)
>>>    		return ret;
>>>    >   	xchan->busy = true;
>>> +	xchan->stop_requested = false;
>>> +	reinit_completion(&xchan->last_interrupt);
>> If stop_requested is true, it should not start another transfer. So I would suggest to add
>>
>>        if (xchan->stop_requested)
>>
>>                   return -ENODEV;
> Maybe -EBUSY in this case?
>
> I thought synchronize() was mandatory in-between. If that's not the
> case then indeed we need to block or error-out if a new transfer
> gets started.

Okay. It looks issue_pending is not expected between terminate_all() and 
synchronize().

This check is not needed.


Thanks,

Lizhi

>
>> at the beginning of xdma_xfer_start().
>>
>> xdma_xfer_start() is protected by chan lock.
>>
>>>    >   	return 0;
>>>    }
> Thanks,
> Miquèl