From: Tanmay Shah <tanmay.shah@amd.com>
To: Jassi Brar <jassisinghbrar@gmail.com>
Cc: <andersson@kernel.org>, <mathieu.poirier@linaro.org>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
<linux-remoteproc@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mailbox: check mailbox queue is full or not
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2025 12:58:21 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <9934e6d0-8f38-4a8e-ae0f-fb86b24cd44c@amd.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CABb+yY388YaM=wLMy1aaDT0E1yN=7Ge2taMWMyEhWvyqDV=3Dg@mail.gmail.com>
On 9/30/25 12:33 PM, Jassi Brar wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 30, 2025 at 11:52 AM Tanmay Shah <tanmay.shah@amd.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Jassi,
>>
>> Please find my comments below.
>>
>> On 9/30/25 9:11 AM, Jassi Brar wrote:
>>> On Thu, Sep 25, 2025 at 1:51 PM Tanmay Shah <tanmay.shah@amd.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Sometimes clients need to know if mailbox queue is full or not before
>>>> posting new message via mailbox. If mailbox queue is full clients can
>>>> choose not to post new message. This doesn't mean current queue length
>>>> should be increased, but clients may want to wait till previous Tx is
>>>> done. This API can help avoid false positive warning from mailbox
>>>> framework "Try increasing MBOX_TX_QUEUE_LEN".
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Tanmay Shah <tanmay.shah@amd.com>
>>>> ---
>>>> drivers/mailbox/mailbox.c | 24 ++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>> drivers/remoteproc/xlnx_r5_remoteproc.c | 4 ++++
>>>> include/linux/mailbox_client.h | 1 +
>>>> 3 files changed, 29 insertions(+)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/mailbox/mailbox.c b/drivers/mailbox/mailbox.c
>>>> index 5cd8ae222073..7afdb2c9006d 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/mailbox/mailbox.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/mailbox/mailbox.c
>>>> @@ -217,6 +217,30 @@ bool mbox_client_peek_data(struct mbox_chan *chan)
>>>> }
>>>> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(mbox_client_peek_data);
>>>>
>>>> +/**
>>>> + * mbox_queue_full - check if mailbox queue is full or not
>>>> + * @chan: Mailbox channel assigned to this client.
>>>> + *
>>>> + * Clients can choose not to send new msg if mbox queue is full.
>>>> + *
>>>> + * Return: true if queue is full else false. < 0 for error
>>>> + */
>>>> +int mbox_queue_full(struct mbox_chan *chan)
>>>> +{
>>>> + unsigned long flags;
>>>> + int res;
>>>> +
>>>> + if (!chan)
>>>> + return -EINVAL;
>>>> +
>>>> + spin_lock_irqsave(&chan->lock, flags);
>>>> + res = (chan->msg_count == (MBOX_TX_QUEUE_LEN - 1));
>>>>
>>> 1) If we really need this, it should be
>>> res = (chan->msg_count == MBOX_TX_QUEUE_LEN);
>>>
>>
>> Ack here.
>>
>>> 2) I am thinking instead, introduce a
>>> struct mbox_client.msg_slots_ro;
>>> Which is a read-only field for the client, denoting how many message
>>> slots are currently available.
>>> The mailbox api will always adjust it when msg_count changes...
>>> chan->cl->msg_slots_ro = MBOX_TX_QUEUE_LEN - chan->msg_count;
>>>
>>
>> It's not possible to make msg_slots_ro true Read-Only. Nothing prevents
>> clients to write to that variable as far as I know.
>>
> Correct, nothing prevents a client from changing 'msg_slots_ro', just
> like nothing
> prevents it from setting tx_done or rx_callback to 0xdeadbabe.
> The '_ro' suffix is to tell the client developer to not mess with it.
> I am slightly more inclined towards this approach because it avoids
> adding another
> convenience api and is more immediately available without needing a spinlock.
To avoid spinlock, msg_slots_ro should be atomic right?
>
Then in the remoteproc driver, before using mbox_send_message, I can
simply check (chan->cl->msg_slots_ro == 0) then don't use mbox_send_message.
> -jassi
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-09-30 17:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-09-25 18:50 Tanmay Shah
2025-09-26 7:37 ` Peng Fan
2025-09-26 15:40 ` Tanmay Shah
2025-09-28 7:56 ` Peng Fan
2025-09-29 14:45 ` Mathieu Poirier
2025-09-29 19:26 ` Tanmay Shah
2025-09-29 19:35 ` Tanmay Shah
2025-09-30 2:41 ` Peng Fan
2025-09-30 14:11 ` Jassi Brar
2025-09-30 16:52 ` Tanmay Shah
2025-09-30 17:33 ` Jassi Brar
2025-09-30 17:58 ` Tanmay Shah [this message]
2025-09-30 18:38 ` Tanmay Shah
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=9934e6d0-8f38-4a8e-ae0f-fb86b24cd44c@amd.com \
--to=tanmay.shah@amd.com \
--cc=andersson@kernel.org \
--cc=jassisinghbrar@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-remoteproc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mathieu.poirier@linaro.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®