linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/3] mailbox: add support for bottom half received data

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: <f0386089-6a47-4751-8581-b6658c1535b9@collabora.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2024 13:05:05 +0200
From: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno <angelogioacchino.delregno@...labora.com>
To: "Karl.Li" <karl.li@...iatek.com>, Jassi Brar <jassisinghbrar@...il.com>,
 Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
 Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org,
 Chungying Lu <chungying.lu@...iatek.com>,
 Project_Global_Chrome_Upstream_Group@...iatek.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] mailbox: add support for bottom half received data

Il 24/10/24 11:25, Karl.Li ha scritto:
> From: Karl Li <karl.li@...iatek.com>
> 
> Within the MediaTek APU subsystem, a message passing mechanism
> is constructed on top of the mailbox system.
> 
> The mailbox only has limited space for each message. The MTK APU firmware
> expects the message header from the mailbox, while the message body
> is passed through some fixed shared memory.
> 
> The mailbox interrupt also serves as a mutex for the shared memory.
> Thus the interrupt may only be cleared after the message is handled.
> Add a new sleepable rx callback for mailbox clients for cases
> where handling the incoming data needs to sleep.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Karl Li <karl.li@...iatek.com>

As said in the review of the ADSP MBOX driver, I really don't think that you need
an extra callback.

Regards,
Angelo