Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-189453-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.199.223 as permitted sender) client-ip=147.75.199.223;
Message-ID: <f8c48554-984f-48fd-aa12-87d39888b0f6@kernel.org>
Date: Sat, 25 May 2024 18:47:08 +0200
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 1/2] dt-bindings: soc: qcom,smsm: Allow specifying
 mboxes instead of qcom,ipc
To: Luca Weiss <luca@z3ntu.xyz>, Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>,
 Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>,
 ~postmarketos/upstreaming@lists.sr.ht
Cc: phone-devel@vger.kernel.org, Bjorn Andersson <andersson@kernel.org>,
 Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@linaro.org>,
 Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@kernel.org>, Conor Dooley
 <conor+dt@kernel.org>, Andy Gross <agross@kernel.org>,
 linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
References: <20240424-smsm-mbox-v1-0-555f3f442841@z3ntu.xyz>
 <5099926.GXAFRqVoOG@g550jk> <e4579702-089e-48cb-bf06-f8e4fb618050@kernel.org>
 <4881282.LvFx2qVVIh@g550jk>
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>
Content-Language: en-US
Autocrypt: addr=krzk@kernel.org; keydata=
 xsFNBFVDQq4BEAC6KeLOfFsAvFMBsrCrJ2bCalhPv5+KQF2PS2+iwZI8BpRZoV+Bd5kWvN79
 cFgcqTTuNHjAvxtUG8pQgGTHAObYs6xeYJtjUH0ZX6ndJ33FJYf5V3yXqqjcZ30FgHzJCFUu
 JMp7PSyMPzpUXfU12yfcRYVEMQrmplNZssmYhiTeVicuOOypWugZKVLGNm0IweVCaZ/DJDIH
 gNbpvVwjcKYrx85m9cBVEBUGaQP6AT7qlVCkrf50v8bofSIyVa2xmubbAwwFA1oxoOusjPIE
 J3iadrwpFvsZjF5uHAKS+7wHLoW9hVzOnLbX6ajk5Hf8Pb1m+VH/E8bPBNNYKkfTtypTDUCj
 NYcd27tjnXfG+SDs/EXNUAIRefCyvaRG7oRYF3Ec+2RgQDRnmmjCjoQNbFrJvJkFHlPeHaeS
 BosGY+XWKydnmsfY7SSnjAzLUGAFhLd/XDVpb1Een2XucPpKvt9ORF+48gy12FA5GduRLhQU
 vK4tU7ojoem/G23PcowM1CwPurC8sAVsQb9KmwTGh7rVz3ks3w/zfGBy3+WmLg++C2Wct6nM
 Pd8/6CBVjEWqD06/RjI2AnjIq5fSEH/BIfXXfC68nMp9BZoy3So4ZsbOlBmtAPvMYX6U8VwD
 TNeBxJu5Ex0Izf1NV9CzC3nNaFUYOY8KfN01X5SExAoVTr09ewARAQABzSVLcnp5c3p0b2Yg
 S296bG93c2tpIDxrcnprQGtlcm5lbC5vcmc+wsGVBBMBCgA/AhsDBgsJCAcDAgYVCAIJCgsE
 FgIDAQIeAQIXgBYhBJvQfg4MUfjVlne3VBuTQ307QWKbBQJgPO8PBQkUX63hAAoJEBuTQ307
 QWKbBn8P+QFxwl7pDsAKR1InemMAmuykCHl+XgC0LDqrsWhAH5TYeTVXGSyDsuZjHvj+FRP+
 gZaEIYSw2Yf0e91U9HXo3RYhEwSmxUQ4Fjhc9qAwGKVPQf6YuQ5yy6pzI8brcKmHHOGrB3tP
 /MODPt81M1zpograAC2WTDzkICfHKj8LpXp45PylD99J9q0Y+gb04CG5/wXs+1hJy/dz0tYy
 iua4nCuSRbxnSHKBS5vvjosWWjWQXsRKd+zzXp6kfRHHpzJkhRwF6ArXi4XnQ+REnoTfM5Fk
 VmVmSQ3yFKKePEzoIriT1b2sXO0g5QXOAvFqB65LZjXG9jGJoVG6ZJrUV1MVK8vamKoVbUEe
 0NlLl/tX96HLowHHoKhxEsbFzGzKiFLh7hyboTpy2whdonkDxpnv/H8wE9M3VW/fPgnL2nPe
 xaBLqyHxy9hA9JrZvxg3IQ61x7rtBWBUQPmEaK0azW+l3ysiNpBhISkZrsW3ZUdknWu87nh6
 eTB7mR7xBcVxnomxWwJI4B0wuMwCPdgbV6YDUKCuSgRMUEiVry10xd9KLypR9Vfyn1AhROrq
 AubRPVeJBf9zR5UW1trJNfwVt3XmbHX50HCcHdEdCKiT9O+FiEcahIaWh9lihvO0ci0TtVGZ
 MCEtaCE80Q3Ma9RdHYB3uVF930jwquplFLNF+IBCn5JRzsFNBFVDXDQBEADNkrQYSREUL4D3
 Gws46JEoZ9HEQOKtkrwjrzlw/tCmqVzERRPvz2Xg8n7+HRCrgqnodIYoUh5WsU84N03KlLue
 MNsWLJBvBaubYN4JuJIdRr4dS4oyF1/fQAQPHh8Thpiz0SAZFx6iWKB7Qrz3OrGCjTPcW6ei
 OMheesVS5hxietSmlin+SilmIAPZHx7n242u6kdHOh+/SyLImKn/dh9RzatVpUKbv34eP1wA
 GldWsRxbf3WP9pFNObSzI/Bo3kA89Xx2rO2roC+Gq4LeHvo7ptzcLcrqaHUAcZ3CgFG88CnA
 6z6lBZn0WyewEcPOPdcUB2Q7D/NiUY+HDiV99rAYPJztjeTrBSTnHeSBPb+qn5ZZGQwIdUW9
 YegxWKvXXHTwB5eMzo/RB6vffwqcnHDoe0q7VgzRRZJwpi6aMIXLfeWZ5Wrwaw2zldFuO4Dt
 91pFzBSOIpeMtfgb/Pfe/a1WJ/GgaIRIBE+NUqckM+3zJHGmVPqJP/h2Iwv6nw8U+7Yyl6gU
 BLHFTg2hYnLFJI4Xjg+AX1hHFVKmvl3VBHIsBv0oDcsQWXqY+NaFahT0lRPjYtrTa1v3tem/
 JoFzZ4B0p27K+qQCF2R96hVvuEyjzBmdq2esyE6zIqftdo4MOJho8uctOiWbwNNq2U9pPWmu
 4vXVFBYIGmpyNPYzRm0QPwARAQABwsF8BBgBCgAmAhsMFiEEm9B+DgxR+NWWd7dUG5NDfTtB
 YpsFAmA872oFCRRflLYACgkQG5NDfTtBYpvScw/9GrqBrVLuJoJ52qBBKUBDo4E+5fU1bjt0
 Gv0nh/hNJuecuRY6aemU6HOPNc2t8QHMSvwbSF+Vp9ZkOvrM36yUOufctoqON+wXrliEY0J4
 ksR89ZILRRAold9Mh0YDqEJc1HmuxYLJ7lnbLYH1oui8bLbMBM8S2Uo9RKqV2GROLi44enVt
 vdrDvo+CxKj2K+d4cleCNiz5qbTxPUW/cgkwG0lJc4I4sso7l4XMDKn95c7JtNsuzqKvhEVS
 oic5by3fbUnuI0cemeizF4QdtX2uQxrP7RwHFBd+YUia7zCcz0//rv6FZmAxWZGy5arNl6Vm
 lQqNo7/Poh8WWfRS+xegBxc6hBXahpyUKphAKYkah+m+I0QToCfnGKnPqyYIMDEHCS/RfqA5
 t8F+O56+oyLBAeWX7XcmyM6TGeVfb+OZVMJnZzK0s2VYAuI0Rl87FBFYgULdgqKV7R7WHzwD
 uZwJCLykjad45hsWcOGk3OcaAGQS6NDlfhM6O9aYNwGL6tGt/6BkRikNOs7VDEa4/HlbaSJo
 7FgndGw1kWmkeL6oQh7wBvYll2buKod4qYntmNKEicoHGU+x91Gcan8mCoqhJkbqrL7+nXG2
 5Q/GS5M9RFWS+nYyJh+c3OcfKqVcZQNANItt7+ULzdNJuhvTRRdC3g9hmCEuNSr+CLMdnRBY fv0=
In-Reply-To: <4881282.LvFx2qVVIh@g550jk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On 24/05/2024 19:55, Luca Weiss wrote:
> On Donnerstag, 23. Mai 2024 08:19:11 MESZ Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 23/05/2024 08:16, Luca Weiss wrote:
>>> On Donnerstag, 23. Mai 2024 08:02:13 MESZ Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>>> On 22/05/2024 19:34, Luca Weiss wrote:
>>>>> On Mittwoch, 22. Mai 2024 08:49:43 MESZ Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>>>>> On 21/05/2024 22:35, Luca Weiss wrote:
>>>>>>> On Dienstag, 21. Mai 2024 10:58:07 MESZ Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 20/05/2024 17:11, Luca Weiss wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Hi Krzysztof
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Ack, sounds good.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Maybe also from you, any opinion between these two binding styles?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> So first using index of mboxes for the numbering, where for the known
>>>>>>>>> usages the first element (and sometimes the 3rd - ipc-2) are empty <>.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The second variant is using mbox-names to get the correct channel-mbox
>>>>>>>>> mapping.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> -               qcom,ipc-1 = <&apcs 8 13>;
>>>>>>>>> -               qcom,ipc-2 = <&apcs 8 9>;
>>>>>>>>> -               qcom,ipc-3 = <&apcs 8 19>;
>>>>>>>>> +               mboxes = <0>, <&apcs 13>, <&apcs 9>, <&apcs 19>;
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> vs.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> -               qcom,ipc-1 = <&apcs 8 13>;
>>>>>>>>> -               qcom,ipc-2 = <&apcs 8 9>;
>>>>>>>>> -               qcom,ipc-3 = <&apcs 8 19>;
>>>>>>>>> +               mboxes = <&apcs 13>, <&apcs 9>, <&apcs 19>;
>>>>>>>>> +               mbox-names = "ipc-1", "ipc-2", "ipc-3";
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Sorry, don't get, ipc-1 is the first mailbox, so why would there be <0>
>>>>>>>> in first case?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Actually not, ipc-0 would be permissible by the driver, used for the 0th host
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> e.g. from:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 	/* Iterate over all hosts to check whom wants a kick */
>>>>>>> 	for (host = 0; host < smsm->num_hosts; host++) {
>>>>>>> 		hostp = &smsm->hosts[host];
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Even though no mailbox is specified in any upstream dts for this 0th host I
>>>>>>> didn't want the bindings to restrict that, that's why in the first example
>>>>>>> there's an empty element (<0>) for the 0th smsm host
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Anyway, the question is if you need to know that some
>>>>>>>> mailbox is missing. But then it is weird to name them "ipc-1" etc.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In either case we'd just query the mbox (either by name or index) and then
>>>>>>> see if it's there? Not quite sure I understand the sentence..
>>>>>>> Pretty sure either binding would work the same way.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The question is: does the driver care only about having some mailboxes
>>>>>> or the driver cares about each specific mailbox? IOW, is skipping ipc-0
>>>>>> important for the driver?
>>>>>
>>>>> There's nothing special from driver side about any mailbox. Some SoCs have
>>>>> a mailbox for e.g. hosts 1&2&3, some have only 1&3, and apq8064 even has
>>>>> 1&2&3&4.
>>>>>
>>>>> And if the driver doesn't find a mailbox for a host, it just ignores it
>>>>> but then of course it can't 'ring' the mailbox for that host when necessary.
>>>>>
>>>>> Not sure how much more I can add here, to be fair I barely understand what
>>>>> this driver is doing myself apart from the obvious.
>>>>
>>>> From what you said, it looks like it is enough to just list mailboxes,
>>>> e.g. for ipc-1, ipc-2 and ipc-4 (so no ipc-0 and ipc-3):
>>>
>>> No, for sure we need also the possibility to list ipc-3.
>>
>> ? You can list it, what's the problem>
> 
> Maybe we're talking past each other...
> 
> You asked why this wouldn't work:
> 
>   e.g. for ipc-1, ipc-2 and ipc-4 (so no ipc-0 and ipc-3):
>   mboxes = <&apcs 13>, <&apcs 9>, <&apcs 19>;
> 
> How would we know that the 3rd mailbox (&apcs 19) is for the 4th host
> (previous ipc-4)?
> 
> 1. If we use mboxes with indexes we'd need to have <0> values for
> "smsm hosts" where we don't have a mailbox for - this is at least
> for the 2nd smsm host (qcom,ipc-2) for a bunch of SoCs.
> 
> 2. If we use mboxes with mbox-names then we could skip that since we
> can directly specify which "smsm host" a given mailbox is for.
> 
> My only question really is whether 1. or 2. is a better idea.
> 
> Is this clearer now or still not?


So again, does the driver care about missing entry? If so, why?

Best regards,
Krzysztof