Re: [PATCH 2/6] Documentation: devicetree: add bindings to support ARM MHU subchannels

From: Bjorn Andersson
Date: Mon May 08 2017 - 13:53:02 EST


On Mon 08 May 10:07 PDT 2017, Sudeep Holla wrote:

>
>
> On 08/05/17 17:46, Jassi Brar wrote:
> > On Mon, May 8, 2017 at 9:40 PM, Rob Herring <robh@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> +Bjorn
> >>
> >> On Tue, May 02, 2017 at 02:55:49PM +0100, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> >>> The ARM MHU has mechanism to assert interrupt signals to facilitate
> >>> inter-processor message based communication. It drives the signal using
> >>> a 32-bit register, with all 32-bits logically ORed together. It also
> >>> enables software to set, clear and check the status of each of the bits
> >>> of this register independently. Each bit of the register can be
> >>> associated with a type of event that can contribute to raising the
> >>> interrupt thereby allowing it to be used as independent subchannels.
> >>>
> >>> Since the first version of this binding can't support sub-channels,
> >>> this patch extends the existing binding to support them.
> >>>
> >>> Cc: Alexey Klimov <alexey.klimov@xxxxxxx>
> >>> Cc: Jassi Brar <jaswinder.singh@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >>> Cc: Rob Herring <robh+dt@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >>> Cc: devicetree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >>> Signed-off-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@xxxxxxx>
> >>> ---
> >>> .../devicetree/bindings/mailbox/arm-mhu.txt | 44 ++++++++++++++++++++--
> >>> 1 file changed, 41 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >>>
> >>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mailbox/arm-mhu.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mailbox/arm-mhu.txt
> >>> index 4971f03f0b33..86a66f7918e2 100644
> >>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mailbox/arm-mhu.txt
> >>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mailbox/arm-mhu.txt
> >>> @@ -10,21 +10,40 @@ STAT register and the remote clears it after having read the data.
> >>> The last channel is specified to be a 'Secure' resource, hence can't be
> >>> used by Linux running NS.
> >>>
> >>> +The MHU drives the interrupt signal using a 32-bit register, with all
> >>> +32-bits logically ORed together. It provides a set of registers to
> >>> +enable software to set, clear and check the status of each of the bits
> >>> +of this register independently. The use of 32 bits per interrupt line
> >>> +enables software to provide more information about the source of the
> >>> +interrupt. For example, each bit of the register can be associated with
> >>> +a type of event that can contribute to raising the interrupt.
> >>
> >> Sounds like a doorbell? (i.e. a single bit mailbox). Bjorn is doing
> >> something similar for QCom h/w. I guess the difference here is you have
> >> 32 sources and 1 output. It seems to me these should be described
> >> similarly.
> >>
> > Yes, QCom controller triggers different interrupt for each bit of a
> > 32bits register i.e, each signal is associated with 1bit information.
> > Whereas MHU signals 32bits at a time to the target cpu.
>
> Agreed. I had a look at Qcom driver, not entirely clear if each bit as
> interrupt as I don't see any interrupt support there.

Each of the (used) bits in the Qualcomm HW are routed to a interrupt
controller in the remote processors.

As the APCS IPC is one way and each incoming "channel" is exposed as a
separate physical interrupt they are directly consumed by the higher
levels as needed - hence there's no traces of interrupts in the APCS
IPC.

> Also, it just adds
> all the 32 channels which I am trying to avoid as at-most 4-5 will be
> used while we end up creating 64 channels.
>

In the Qualcomm platform I'm looking at right now 15 of the 32 bits are
used by the local CPU, so the utilization isn't awesome but I didn't
feel the waste was worth addressing in my case.

You should be able to provide a custom of_xlate that hides the fact that
your mailbox-space is sparse - i.e. only register the mailboxes you have
but expose them with ids as expected by the clients.

Regards,
Bjorn