linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V4 2/5] mailbox: Add support for QTI CPUCP mailbox controller

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]

Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2024 21:14:32 -0500
From: Jassi Brar <jassisinghbrar@...il.com>
To: Sibi Sankar <quic_sibis@...cinc.com>
Cc: sudeep.holla@....com, cristian.marussi@....com, andersson@...nel.org, 
	konrad.dybcio@...aro.org, robh+dt@...nel.org, 
	krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org, dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org, 
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, 
	devicetree@...r.kernel.org, quic_rgottimu@...cinc.com, 
	quic_kshivnan@...cinc.com, conor+dt@...nel.org, quic_gkohli@...cinc.com, 
	quic_nkela@...cinc.com, quic_psodagud@...cinc.com, abel.vesa@...aro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V4 2/5] mailbox: Add support for QTI CPUCP mailbox controller

On Mon, Apr 22, 2024 at 11:41 AM Sibi Sankar <quic_sibis@...cinc.com> wrote:
>
> Add support for CPUSS Control Processor (CPUCP) mailbox controller,
> this driver enables communication between AP and CPUCP by acting as
> a doorbell between them.
>
> Reviewed-by: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org>
> Signed-off-by: Sibi Sankar <quic_sibis@...cinc.com>
> ---

Do you want to add an entry in the MAINTAINERS ?

> diff --git a/drivers/mailbox/qcom-cpucp-mbox.c b/drivers/mailbox/qcom-cpucp-mbox.c
 .....
> +static irqreturn_t qcom_cpucp_mbox_irq_fn(int irq, void *data)
> +{
> +       struct qcom_cpucp_mbox *cpucp = data;
> +       struct mbox_chan *chan;
> +       unsigned long flags;
> +       u64 status;
> +       u32 val;
> +       int i;
> +
The variables flags, val and chan are better inside the for loop below.

> +       status = readq(cpucp->rx_base + APSS_CPUCP_RX_MBOX_STAT);
> +
> +       for_each_set_bit(i, (unsigned long *)&status, APSS_CPUCP_IPC_CHAN_SUPPORTED) {
> +               val = readl(cpucp->rx_base + APSS_CPUCP_RX_MBOX_CMD(i) + APSS_CPUCP_MBOX_CMD_OFF);
> +               chan = &cpucp->chans[i];
> +               /* Provide mutual exclusion with changes to chan->cl */
> +               spin_lock_irqsave(&chan->lock, flags);
> +               if (chan->cl)
> +                       mbox_chan_received_data(chan, &val);
> +               writeq(BIT(i), cpucp->rx_base + APSS_CPUCP_RX_MBOX_CLEAR);
> +               spin_unlock_irqrestore(&chan->lock, flags);
> +       }
> +
> +       return IRQ_HANDLED;
> +}
> +

Thanks
Jassi