[PATCH v2] firmware: arm_scmi: Queue in scmi layer for mailbox implementation

[Sudeep Holla]

On Mon, Oct 14, 2024 at 10:21:28AM -0700, Florian Fainelli wrote:
> On 10/14/24 02:55, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> > On Sun, Oct 13, 2024 at 10:26:49AM +0100, Cristian Marussi wrote:
> > > On Fri, Oct 11, 2024 at 12:15:07PM -0700, Justin Chen wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > Yes, I see the implementation. Looks like it returns the position in the
> > > > ring buffer. I also confirmed with CONFIG_DEBUG_MUTEXES which triggers a
> > > > warning.
> > > > 
> > > > What about this?
> > > > if (ret >= 0)
> > > > 	ret = 0
> > > > else
> > > > 	mutex_unlock(&smbox->chan_lock);
> > > > 
> > > > A bit easier to read IMO.
> > > 
> > > Oh yes much better definitely...or, maybe, even more simply to read:
> > > 
> > >   ...
> > > 
> > >    mutex_lock(&smbox->chan_lock);
> > >    ret = mbox_send_message(smbox->chan, xfer);
> > >    if (ret < 0) {
> > >   	mutex_unlock(&smbox->chan_lock);
> > >          return ret;
> > >    }
> > > 
> > >    return 0;
> > > }
> > > 
> > > .... up to You...not sure what Sudeep prefers...
> > > 
> > 
> > I like this better. Also I was hoping Justin would send v3 soonish, I want
> > to send PR for fixes soon. So I have gone ahead and fixed all your comments
> > myself. I had seen the doxygen one from builder already and had fixed it up
> > last week when I added this to -next.
> > 
> 
> Here's his v3:
> 
> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20241014160717.1678953-1-justin.chen@broadcom.com/
> 
> we are on the other side of the pond ;)

I do understand 😉, it was my own rush and hence I did the changes myself.
But since I haven't tagged, I will pull it instead. BTW looks like the
arm-scmi list was dropped in v3 or my filters are misbehaving. Thanks for the
link.

-- 
Regards,
Sudeep