| Message ID | 20230625123514.4069724-1-peng.fan@oss.nxp.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | remoteproc: imx_rproc: iterate all notifiyids in rx callback | expand |
On Sun, Jun 25, 2023 at 08:35:14PM +0800, Peng Fan (OSS) wrote: > From: Peng Fan <peng.fan@nxp.com> > > The current code has an assumption that there is one tx and one rx > vring, but it is not always true. There maybe more vrings. So iterate > all notifyids to not miss any vring events. Can you be more specific on the use case where more than 2 virqueues are allocated? The remoteproc core can handle more than 2 but right now the only configuration I see doesn't support more than that. > > Signed-off-by: Peng Fan <peng.fan@nxp.com> > --- > drivers/remoteproc/imx_rproc.c | 14 ++++++++++++-- > 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/imx_rproc.c b/drivers/remoteproc/imx_rproc.c > index f9874fc5a80f..e3f40d0e9f3d 100644 > --- a/drivers/remoteproc/imx_rproc.c > +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/imx_rproc.c > @@ -725,13 +725,23 @@ static int imx_rproc_addr_init(struct imx_rproc *priv, > return 0; > } > > +static int imx_rproc_notified_idr_cb(int id, void *ptr, void *data) > +{ > + struct rproc *rproc = data; > + > + if (rproc_vq_interrupt(rproc, id) == IRQ_NONE) > + dev_dbg(&rproc->dev, "no message in vqid: %d\n", id); > + > + return 0; > +} > + > static void imx_rproc_vq_work(struct work_struct *work) > { > struct imx_rproc *priv = container_of(work, struct imx_rproc, > rproc_work); > + struct rproc *rproc = priv->rproc; > > - rproc_vq_interrupt(priv->rproc, 0); > - rproc_vq_interrupt(priv->rproc, 1); > + idr_for_each(&rproc->notifyids, imx_rproc_notified_idr_cb, rproc); > } > > static void imx_rproc_rx_callback(struct mbox_client *cl, void *msg) > -- > 2.37.1 >
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] remoteproc: imx_rproc: iterate all notifiyids in rx > callback > > On Sun, Jun 25, 2023 at 08:35:14PM +0800, Peng Fan (OSS) wrote: > > From: Peng Fan <peng.fan@nxp.com> > > > > The current code has an assumption that there is one tx and one rx > > vring, but it is not always true. There maybe more vrings. So iterate > > all notifyids to not miss any vring events. > > Can you be more specific on the use case where more than 2 virqueues are > allocated? The remoteproc core can handle more than 2 but right now the > only configuration I see doesn't support more than that. In downstream tree, we have below remoteproc node. It use vdev0 vring0/vring1 for vdev0, vdev1 vring0/vring1 for vdev1. vdev0 and vdev1 are for different services, saying vdev0 for gpio rpmsg, vdev1 for i2c rpmsg. cm33: imx93-cm33 { compatible = "fsl,imx93-cm33"; mbox-names = "tx", "rx", "rxdb"; mboxes = <&mu1 0 1 &mu1 1 1 &mu1 3 1>; memory-region = <&vdevbuffer>, <&vdev0vring0>, <&vdev0vring1>, <&vdev1vring0>, <&vdev1vring1>, <&rsc_table>; fsl,startup-delay-ms = <500>; }; Thanks, Peng. > > > > > Signed-off-by: Peng Fan <peng.fan@nxp.com> > > --- > > drivers/remoteproc/imx_rproc.c | 14 ++++++++++++-- > > 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/imx_rproc.c > > b/drivers/remoteproc/imx_rproc.c index f9874fc5a80f..e3f40d0e9f3d > > 100644 > > --- a/drivers/remoteproc/imx_rproc.c > > +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/imx_rproc.c > > @@ -725,13 +725,23 @@ static int imx_rproc_addr_init(struct imx_rproc > *priv, > > return 0; > > } > > > > +static int imx_rproc_notified_idr_cb(int id, void *ptr, void *data) { > > + struct rproc *rproc = data; > > + > > + if (rproc_vq_interrupt(rproc, id) == IRQ_NONE) > > + dev_dbg(&rproc->dev, "no message in vqid: %d\n", id); > > + > > + return 0; > > +} > > + > > static void imx_rproc_vq_work(struct work_struct *work) { > > struct imx_rproc *priv = container_of(work, struct imx_rproc, > > rproc_work); > > + struct rproc *rproc = priv->rproc; > > > > - rproc_vq_interrupt(priv->rproc, 0); > > - rproc_vq_interrupt(priv->rproc, 1); > > + idr_for_each(&rproc->notifyids, imx_rproc_notified_idr_cb, rproc); > > } > > > > static void imx_rproc_rx_callback(struct mbox_client *cl, void *msg) > > -- > > 2.37.1 > >
On Tue, 27 Jun 2023 at 18:55, Peng Fan <peng.fan@nxp.com> wrote: > > > Subject: Re: [PATCH] remoteproc: imx_rproc: iterate all notifiyids in rx > > callback > > > > On Sun, Jun 25, 2023 at 08:35:14PM +0800, Peng Fan (OSS) wrote: > > > From: Peng Fan <peng.fan@nxp.com> > > > > > > The current code has an assumption that there is one tx and one rx > > > vring, but it is not always true. There maybe more vrings. So iterate > > > all notifyids to not miss any vring events. > > > > Can you be more specific on the use case where more than 2 virqueues are > > allocated? The remoteproc core can handle more than 2 but right now the > > only configuration I see doesn't support more than that. > > In downstream tree, we have below remoteproc node. It use > vdev0 vring0/vring1 for vdev0, vdev1 vring0/vring1 for vdev1. > vdev0 and vdev1 are for different services, saying vdev0 for gpio rpmsg, > vdev1 for i2c rpmsg. So you are talking about cases where more than one vdev are instantiated and a single callback channel is available. Please fix your changelog description. The way it is currently written one can easily think you are referring to more than 2 virtqueues for each vdev. One more comment below. > cm33: imx93-cm33 { > compatible = "fsl,imx93-cm33"; > mbox-names = "tx", "rx", "rxdb"; > mboxes = <&mu1 0 1 > &mu1 1 1 > &mu1 3 1>; > memory-region = <&vdevbuffer>, <&vdev0vring0>, <&vdev0vring1>, > <&vdev1vring0>, <&vdev1vring1>, <&rsc_table>; > fsl,startup-delay-ms = <500>; > }; > > Thanks, > Peng. > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Peng Fan <peng.fan@nxp.com> > > > --- > > > drivers/remoteproc/imx_rproc.c | 14 ++++++++++++-- > > > 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/imx_rproc.c > > > b/drivers/remoteproc/imx_rproc.c index f9874fc5a80f..e3f40d0e9f3d > > > 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/remoteproc/imx_rproc.c > > > +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/imx_rproc.c > > > @@ -725,13 +725,23 @@ static int imx_rproc_addr_init(struct imx_rproc > > *priv, > > > return 0; > > > } > > > > > > +static int imx_rproc_notified_idr_cb(int id, void *ptr, void *data) { > > > + struct rproc *rproc = data; > > > + > > > + if (rproc_vq_interrupt(rproc, id) == IRQ_NONE) > > > + dev_dbg(&rproc->dev, "no message in vqid: %d\n", id); > > > + A debug message is already displayed by vring_interrupt(), please remove. Thanks, Mathieu > > > + return 0; > > > +} > > > + > > > static void imx_rproc_vq_work(struct work_struct *work) { > > > struct imx_rproc *priv = container_of(work, struct imx_rproc, > > > rproc_work); > > > + struct rproc *rproc = priv->rproc; > > > > > > - rproc_vq_interrupt(priv->rproc, 0); > > > - rproc_vq_interrupt(priv->rproc, 1); > > > + idr_for_each(&rproc->notifyids, imx_rproc_notified_idr_cb, rproc); > > > } > > > > > > static void imx_rproc_rx_callback(struct mbox_client *cl, void *msg) > > > -- > > > 2.37.1 > > >
diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/imx_rproc.c b/drivers/remoteproc/imx_rproc.c index f9874fc5a80f..e3f40d0e9f3d 100644 --- a/drivers/remoteproc/imx_rproc.c +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/imx_rproc.c @@ -725,13 +725,23 @@ static int imx_rproc_addr_init(struct imx_rproc *priv, return 0; } +static int imx_rproc_notified_idr_cb(int id, void *ptr, void *data) +{ + struct rproc *rproc = data; + + if (rproc_vq_interrupt(rproc, id) == IRQ_NONE) + dev_dbg(&rproc->dev, "no message in vqid: %d\n", id); + + return 0; +} + static void imx_rproc_vq_work(struct work_struct *work) { struct imx_rproc *priv = container_of(work, struct imx_rproc, rproc_work); + struct rproc *rproc = priv->rproc; - rproc_vq_interrupt(priv->rproc, 0); - rproc_vq_interrupt(priv->rproc, 1); + idr_for_each(&rproc->notifyids, imx_rproc_notified_idr_cb, rproc); } static void imx_rproc_rx_callback(struct mbox_client *cl, void *msg)