Re: [PATCH v13 0/4] Mediatek MT8173 CMDQ support
From: Horng-Shyang Liao <hidden>
Date: 2016-09-02 08:51:20
Also in:
linux-arm-kernel, linux-mediatek, lkml
Hi Jassi, On Wed, 2016-08-31 at 14:15 +0530, Jassi Brar wrote:
On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 1:43 PM, Horng-Shyang Liao [off-list ref] wrote:
[...]
quoted
quoted
Platforms that need shared access to a channel, implement a 'server' driver that serialise (which is needed still) the access to common channel. If you think you don't need mutual exclusion and don't care about replies, simply share the mailbox handle among different clients.Thank you for your kindly reply. We would like to discuss further with you on this topic. Our requirement is (1) cmdq task cannot be split, and (2) cmdq thread can have multiple cmdq tasks from different clients. According to your comment "implement a 'server' driver that serialise the access to common channel", do you mean we should implement cmdq client (mailbox client) as a server and other clients call the functions of cmdq client? clients --> cmdq client (mailbox client) --> cmdq (mailbox controller) If so, could you please tell us the benefit of using mailbox framework?You don't have to reinvent 80% of the wheel and reuse the mailbox.c core that supports many features and is tested on many platforms. Your implementation is going to be quite similar, only you clump all the code in one file and you use different terminology. You said "we will acquire gce thread for client dynamically by internal policy in cmdq driver" On mailbox api, this maps to simply sharing the channel/thread handle, protected by a lock, among clients on some basis (like FCFS or whatever you internal policy is). So your server driver could be very thin. And all your clients could follow the mailbox api (which is good from the point of reusability/portability).quoted
Our original plan is to let cmdq driver manage cmdq thread internally. Cmdq driver can choose a suitable cmdq thread to execute a flushed cmdq task dynamically, and client doesn't need to know the existence of cmdq thread. Could you also please tell us the purpose of putting all mailbox driver into mailbox folder? We know that some other drivers also follow this rule, and just want to know more details.Any driver that implements the Mailbox API should live in drivers/mailbox/. And why you should implement mailbox api, is explained above.
Thank you for your explanation. I will move cmdq driver to mailbox folder in the next version. Thanks, HS -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html