From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.2 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_GIT autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E9B6FC43219 for ; Mon, 29 Apr 2019 13:15:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B70222084B for ; Mon, 29 Apr 2019 13:15:37 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ti.com header.i=@ti.com header.b="aZPVYKvS" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728188AbfD2NPg (ORCPT ); Mon, 29 Apr 2019 09:15:36 -0400 Received: from lelv0142.ext.ti.com ([198.47.23.249]:35602 "EHLO lelv0142.ext.ti.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725838AbfD2NPg (ORCPT ); Mon, 29 Apr 2019 09:15:36 -0400 Received: from fllv0035.itg.ti.com ([10.64.41.0]) by lelv0142.ext.ti.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id x3TDFXDT011289; Mon, 29 Apr 2019 08:15:33 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ti.com; s=ti-com-17Q1; t=1556543733; bh=HN/jzaRvz1JyDuf1CpLRfTlESw7cOTI+4eWqb3p3uHs=; h=From:To:CC:Subject:Date; b=aZPVYKvSs4XGsvRyyQlumoeabU7kQ3aIWnq9DR3ULQVVHYCdhFSBYshq8VIfq8zFb 1N+Gl1DMqcPE2dZJloz6jQugv8FuCoYUKnCJEXYZZA3odejeIWQL4iqIQ/JvbzDQja 0doKz9J08AzsAenW0G8Akq1b7v6h7DH9L3aZr0jI= Received: from DFLE102.ent.ti.com (dfle102.ent.ti.com [10.64.6.23]) by fllv0035.itg.ti.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id x3TDFXuN112860 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL); Mon, 29 Apr 2019 08:15:33 -0500 Received: from DFLE102.ent.ti.com (10.64.6.23) by DFLE102.ent.ti.com (10.64.6.23) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.1713.5; Mon, 29 Apr 2019 08:15:33 -0500 Received: from fllv0040.itg.ti.com (10.64.41.20) by DFLE102.ent.ti.com (10.64.6.23) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.1713.5 via Frontend Transport; Mon, 29 Apr 2019 08:15:33 -0500 Received: from legion.dal.design.ti.com (legion.dal.design.ti.com [128.247.22.53]) by fllv0040.itg.ti.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id x3TDFXZw083553; Mon, 29 Apr 2019 08:15:33 -0500 Received: from localhost ([10.250.67.168]) by legion.dal.design.ti.com (8.11.7p1+Sun/8.11.7) with ESMTP id x3TDFWm02994; Mon, 29 Apr 2019 08:15:33 -0500 (CDT) From: "Andrew F. Davis" To: Nishanth Menon , Tero Kristo , Santosh Shilimkar CC: , , "Andrew F . Davis" Subject: [PATCH] firmware: ti_sci: Always request response from firmware Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2019 09:15:33 -0400 Message-ID: <20190429131533.25122-1-afd@ti.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.21.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Type: text/plain X-EXCLAIMER-MD-CONFIG: e1e8a2fd-e40a-4ac6-ac9b-f7e9cc9ee180 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org TI-SCI firmware will only respond to messages when the TI_SCI_FLAG_REQ_ACK_ON_PROCESSED flag is set. Most messages already do this, set this for the ones that do not. This will be enforced in future firmware that better match the TI-SCI specifications, this patch will not break users of existing firmware. Fixes: aa276781a64a ("firmware: Add basic support for TI System Control Interface (TI-SCI) protocol") Signed-off-by: Andrew F. Davis Acked-by: Nishanth Menon Tested-by: Alejandro Hernandez --- drivers/firmware/ti_sci.c | 8 ++++---- 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/firmware/ti_sci.c b/drivers/firmware/ti_sci.c index 3fbbb61012c4..3f202c63b9a6 100644 --- a/drivers/firmware/ti_sci.c +++ b/drivers/firmware/ti_sci.c @@ -448,9 +448,9 @@ static int ti_sci_cmd_get_revision(struct ti_sci_info *info) struct ti_sci_xfer *xfer; int ret; - /* No need to setup flags since it is expected to respond */ xfer = ti_sci_get_one_xfer(info, TI_SCI_MSG_VERSION, - 0x0, sizeof(struct ti_sci_msg_hdr), + TI_SCI_FLAG_REQ_ACK_ON_PROCESSED, + sizeof(struct ti_sci_msg_hdr), sizeof(*rev_info)); if (IS_ERR(xfer)) { ret = PTR_ERR(xfer); @@ -578,9 +578,9 @@ static int ti_sci_get_device_state(const struct ti_sci_handle *handle, info = handle_to_ti_sci_info(handle); dev = info->dev; - /* Response is expected, so need of any flags */ xfer = ti_sci_get_one_xfer(info, TI_SCI_MSG_GET_DEVICE_STATE, - 0, sizeof(*req), sizeof(*resp)); + TI_SCI_FLAG_REQ_ACK_ON_PROCESSED, + sizeof(*req), sizeof(*resp)); if (IS_ERR(xfer)) { ret = PTR_ERR(xfer); dev_err(dev, "Message alloc failed(%d)\n", ret); -- 2.21.0