On Tue 09 May 19:33 PDT 2017, Jassi Brar wrote: > On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 12:41 AM, Bjorn Andersson > <bjorn.andersson@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Tue 09 May 09:41 PDT 2017, Jassi Brar wrote: [..] > > The part where this piece of hardware differs from the other mailboxes > > is that TX is done as send_data() returns and in the realm of the > > mailbox there is no such thing as "tx done". So how about we extend the > > framework to handle stateless and message-less doorbells? > > > This is a very common usecase. It would be unfair to other platforms > to modify the API just because you find it awkward to call > mbox_client_txdone() right after mbox_send_message(). For example, > drivers/firmware/tegra/bpmp.c > I'd much rather have mbox_send_message_and_tick() than implant a new api. > I wasn't proposing to implement a new API; for mailbox controllers with tx method set to POLL the client will only have call mbox_send_data() nothing else. So I proposed [1] yesterday, that will make the apcs controller behave just like this case. Looking at it again, making sure that tx method is TXDONE_BY_ACK should make mbox_client_txdone() essentially a nop, only locking the channel spinlock twice and then returning, as send_data() didn't leave any data in the queue. Is my understanding of this correct? So please let me know what you think about [1], if you don't like it I'll fix the things pointed to by Stephen and we'll have to live with the two calls. [1] https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9718931/ Regards, Bjorn -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-soc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
