Hi,
On 6/14/23 17:24, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 24, 2023 at 02:49:29PM +0200, Arnaud POULIQUEN wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> On 4/22/23 12:42, Sarannya S wrote:
>>> From: Deepak Kumar Singh <quic_deesin@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>
>>> Some transports like Glink support the state notifications between
>>> clients using flow control signals similar to serial protocol signals.
>>> Local glink client drivers can send and receive flow control status
>>> to glink clients running on remote processors.
>>>
>>> Add APIs to support sending and receiving of flow control status by
>>> rpmsg clients.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Deepak Kumar Singh <quic_deesin@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> Signed-off-by: Sarannya S <quic_sarannya@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> ---
>>> drivers/rpmsg/rpmsg_core.c | 21 +++++++++++++++++++++
>>> drivers/rpmsg/rpmsg_internal.h | 2 ++
>>> include/linux/rpmsg.h | 15 +++++++++++++++
>>> 3 files changed, 38 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/rpmsg/rpmsg_core.c b/drivers/rpmsg/rpmsg_core.c
>>> index a2207c0..e8bbe05 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/rpmsg/rpmsg_core.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/rpmsg/rpmsg_core.c
>>> @@ -331,6 +331,25 @@ int rpmsg_trysend_offchannel(struct rpmsg_endpoint *ept, u32 src, u32 dst,
>>> EXPORT_SYMBOL(rpmsg_trysend_offchannel);
>>>
>>> /**
>>> + * rpmsg_set_flow_control() - sets/clears serial flow control signals
>>> + * @ept: the rpmsg endpoint
>>> + * @enable: pause/resume incoming data flow
>>> + * @dst: destination address of the endpoint
>>> + *
>>> + * Return: 0 on success and an appropriate error value on failure.
>>> + */
>>> +int rpmsg_set_flow_control(struct rpmsg_endpoint *ept, bool enable, u32 dst)
>>> +{
>>> + if (WARN_ON(!ept))
>>> + return -EINVAL;
>>> + if (!ept->ops->set_flow_control)
>>> + return -ENXIO;
>>
>> Here we return an error if the backend does not implement the ops.
>> But the set_flow_control ops is optional.
>> Should we return 0 instead with a debug message?
>>
>
> It seems reasonable to allow the software to react to the absence of
> flow control support, so a debug message wouldn't help.
>
> But advertising that more explicitly by returning something like
> EOPNOTSUPP seems better.
Right, this seems more reliable.
Thanks,
Arnaud
>
> Regards,
> Bjorn
