linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 2/6] firmware: ti

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: <20240730152217.ko4eoiwwfckmnmkh@grumpily>
Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2024 10:22:17 -0500
From: Nishanth Menon <nm@...com>
To: Andrew Davis <afd@...com>
CC: Markus Schneider-Pargmann <msp@...libre.com>,
        Tero Kristo
	<kristo@...nel.org>,
        Santosh Shilimkar <ssantosh@...nel.org>,
        Rob Herring
	<robh@...nel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
        Conor Dooley
	<conor+dt@...nel.org>,
        Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@...com>,
        Vibhore Vardhan
	<vibhore@...com>, Kevin Hilman <khilman@...libre.com>,
        Dhruva Gole
	<d-gole@...com>, <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/6] firmware: ti_sci: Partial-IO support

On 10:12-20240730, Andrew Davis wrote:
[...]

> > +	if (response_expected) {
> 
> If a response is not expected why not simply return above and not add even more
> indention here? Also, in that case, is the call to mbox_client_txdone() needed?

Unless I am mistaken, if you ignore the actual shutdown usage, the
mbox_client_txdone will need to be invoked for the tx_tick to be
invoked for the next message in the queue to be submitted


-- 
Regards,
Nishanth Menon
Key (0xDDB5849D1736249D) / Fingerprint: F8A2 8693 54EB 8232 17A3  1A34 DDB5 849D 1736 249D