On Thu, 2017-02-16 at 21:02 +0530, Jassi Brar wrote: > On Mon, Feb 6, 2017 at 11:07 AM, Horng-Shyang Liao <hs.liao@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hi Jassi, > > > > On Wed, 2017-02-01 at 10:52 +0530, Jassi Brar wrote: > >> On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 2:07 PM, Horng-Shyang Liao <hs.liao@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > Hi Jassi, > >> > > >> > On Thu, 2017-01-26 at 10:08 +0530, Jassi Brar wrote: > >> >> On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 8:36 AM, HS Liao <hs.liao@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> >> > >> >> > diff --git a/drivers/mailbox/mtk-cmdq-mailbox.c b/drivers/mailbox/mtk-cmdq-mailbox.c > >> >> > new file mode 100644 > >> >> > index 0000000..747bcd3 > >> >> > --- /dev/null > >> >> > +++ b/drivers/mailbox/mtk-cmdq-mailbox.c > >> >> > >> >> ... > >> >> > >> >> > +static void cmdq_task_exec(struct cmdq_pkt *pkt, struct cmdq_thread *thread) > >> >> > +{ > >> >> > + struct cmdq *cmdq; > >> >> > + struct cmdq_task *task; > >> >> > + unsigned long curr_pa, end_pa; > >> >> > + > >> >> > + cmdq = dev_get_drvdata(thread->chan->mbox->dev); > >> >> > + > >> >> > + /* Client should not flush new tasks if suspended. */ > >> >> > + WARN_ON(cmdq->suspended); > >> >> > + > >> >> > + task = kzalloc(sizeof(*task), GFP_ATOMIC); > >> >> > + task->cmdq = cmdq; > >> >> > + INIT_LIST_HEAD(&task->list_entry); > >> >> > + task->pa_base = dma_map_single(cmdq->mbox.dev, pkt->va_base, > >> >> > + pkt->cmd_buf_size, DMA_TO_DEVICE); > >> >> > > >> >> You seem to parse the requests and responses, that should ideally be > >> >> done in client driver. > >> >> Also, we are here in atomic context, can you move it in client driver > >> >> (before the spin_lock)? > >> >> Maybe by adding a new 'pa_base' member as well in 'cmdq_pkt'. > >> > > >> > will do > > > > I agree with moving dma_map_single out from spin_lock. > > > > However, mailbox clients cannot map virtual memory to mailbox > > controller's device for DMA. > > > If DMA is a resource used by MBox to transfer data, then yes the > mapping needs to be done in the Mbox controller driver. To map memory > outside of spinlock, you could schedule a tasklet in send_data() ? Hi Jassi, For CMDQ, the order of CMDQ tasks should be guaranteed. However, it seems tasklet cannot ensure this requirement. Quote from Linux Device Drivers 3rd edition ch7. "void tasklet_schedule(struct tasklet_struct *t); Schedule the tasklet for execution. If a tasklet is scheduled again before it has a chance to run, it runs only once...." May I use workqueue instead of tasklet? Thanks, HS -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html