lists.openwall.net   lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  linux-hardening  linux-cve-announce  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <7a2f972d-fdd0-d0f7-cac2-1989980ed872@gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 25 Aug 2021 18:38:19 +0200
From:   Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
To:     Cristian Marussi <cristian.marussi@....com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Cc:     sudeep.holla@....com, james.quinlan@...adcom.com,
        Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com, etienne.carriere@...aro.org,
        vincent.guittot@...aro.org, souvik.chakravarty@....com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 11/12] [RFC] firmware: arm_scmi: Add
 sync_cmds_atomic_replies transport flag



On 8/24/2021 3:59 PM, Cristian Marussi wrote:
> A flag is added to let the transport signal the core that its handling of
> synchronous command messages implies that, after .send_message has returned
> successfully, the requested command can be assumed to be fully and
> completely executed on SCMI platform side so that any possible response
> value is already immediately available to be retrieved by a .fetch_reponse:
> in other words the polling phase can be skipped in such a case and the
> response values accessed straight away.
> 
> Note that all of the above applies only when polling mode of operation was
> selected by the core: if instead a completion IRQ was found to be available
> the normal response processing path based on completions will still be
> followed.

This might actually have to be settable on a per-message basis ideally 
since we may be transporting short lived SCMI messages for which the 
completion can be done at SMC time, and long lived SCMI messages (e.g.: 
involving a voltage change) for which we would prefer a completion 
interrupt. Jim, what do you think?
-- 
Florian

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ