summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/common.h
AgeCommit message (Collapse)Author
2019-08-12firmware: arm_scmi: Use {get,put}_unaligned_le{32,64} accessorsSudeep Holla
Instead of type-casting the {tx,rx}.buf all over the place while accessing them to read/write __le{32,64} from/to the firmware, let's use the existing {get,put}_unaligned_le{32,64} accessors to hide all the type cast ugliness. Suggested-by: Philipp Zabel <p.zabel@pengutronix.de> Reviewed-by: Philipp Zabel <p.zabel@pengutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
2019-08-12firmware: arm_scmi: Add support for asynchronous commands and delayed responseSudeep Holla
Messages that are sent to platform, also known as commands and can be: 1. Synchronous commands that block the channel until the requested work has been completed. The platform responds to these commands over the same channel and hence can't be used to send another command until the previous command has completed. 2. Asynchronous commands on the other hand, the platform schedules the requested work to complete later in time and returns almost immediately freeing the channel for new commands. The response indicates the success or failure in the ability to schedule the requested work. When the work has completed, the platform sends an additional delayed response message. Using the same transmit buffer used for sending the asynchronous command even for the delayed response corresponding to it simplifies handling of the delayed response. It's the caller of asynchronous command that is responsible for allocating the completion flag that scmi driver can complete to indicate the arrival of delayed response. Signed-off-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
2019-08-12firmware: arm_scmi: Use the term 'message' instead of 'command'Sudeep Holla
In preparation to adding support for other two types of messages that SCMI specification mentions, let's replace the term 'command' with the correct term 'message'. As per the specification the messages are of 3 types: commands(synchronous or asynchronous), delayed responses and notifications. Signed-off-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
2019-06-19firmware: arm_scmi: Use the correct style for SPDX License IdentifierNishad Kamdar
This patch corrects the SPDX License Identifier style in header file related to Firmware Drivers for ARM SCMI Message Protocol. For C header files Documentation/process/license-rules.rst mandates C-like comments (opposed to C source files where C++ style should be used) Changes made by using a script provided by Joe Perches here: https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/2/7/46 Suggested-by: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> Signed-off-by: Nishad Kamdar <nishadkamdar@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2018-05-10firmware: arm_scmi: drop unused `con_priv` structure memberSudeep Holla
Initially con_priv was supposedly used for transport specific data when the SCMI driver had an abstraction to communicate with different mailbox controllers. But after some discussions, the idea was dropped but this variable slipped through the cracks. This patch gets rid of this unused variable. Signed-off-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
2018-05-10firmware: arm_scmi: rename scmi_xfer_{init,get,put}Sudeep Holla
Just after the initial patches were queued, Jonathan Cameron mentioned that scmi_one_xfer_{get_put} were not very clear and suggested to use scmi_xfer_{alloc,free}. While I agree to some extent, the reason not to have alloc/free as these are preallocated buffers and these functions just returns a reference to free slot in that preallocated array. However it was agreed to drop "_one" as it's implicit that we are always dealing with one slot anyways. This patch updates the name accordingly dropping "_one" in both {get,put} functions. Also scmi_one_xfer_init is renamed as scmi_xfer_get_init to reflect the fact that it gets the free slots and then initialise it. Reported-by: Jonathan Cameron <jonathan.cameron@huawei.com> Signed-off-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
2018-05-09firmware: arm_scmi: fix kernel-docs documentationSudeep Holla
There are few missing descriptions for function parameters and structure members along with certain instances where excessive function parameters or structure members are described. This patch fixes all of those warnings. Reported-by: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com> Signed-off-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
2018-05-09firmware: arm_scmi: improve code readability using bitfield accessor macrosSudeep Holla
By using FIELD_{FIT,GET,PREP} and GENMASK macro accessors we can avoid some clumpsy custom shifting and masking macros and also improve the code better readability. Signed-off-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
2018-02-28firmware: arm_scmi: add initial support for performance protocolSudeep Holla
The performance protocol is intended for the performance management of group(s) of device(s) that run in the same performance domain. It includes even the CPUs. A performance domain is defined by a set of devices that always have to run at the same performance level. For example, a set of CPUs that share a voltage domain, and have a common frequency control, is said to be in the same performance domain. The commands in this protocol provide functionality to describe the protocol version, describe various attribute flags, set and get the performance level of a domain. It also supports discovery of the list of performance levels supported by a performance domain, and the properties of each performance level. This patch adds basic support for the performance protocol. Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> Signed-off-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
2018-02-28firmware: arm_scmi: add scmi protocol bus to enumerate protocol devicesSudeep Holla
The SCMI specification encompasses various protocols. However, not every protocol has to be present on a given platform/implementation as not every protocol is relevant for it. Furthermore, the platform chooses which protocols it exposes to a given agent. The only protocol that must be implemented is the base protocol. The base protocol is used by an agent to discover which protocols are available to it. In order to enumerate the discovered implemented protocols, this patch adds support for a separate scmi protocol bus. It also adds mechanism to register support for different protocols. Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> Signed-off-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
2018-02-28firmware: arm_scmi: add common infrastructure and support for base protocolSudeep Holla
The base protocol describes the properties of the implementation and provide generic error management. The base protocol provides commands to describe protocol version, discover implementation specific attributes and vendor/sub-vendor identification, list of protocols implemented and the various agents are in the system including OSPM and the platform. It also supports registering for notifications of platform errors. This protocol is mandatory. This patch adds support for the same along with some basic infrastructure to add support for other protocols. Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> Signed-off-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
2018-02-28firmware: arm_scmi: add basic driver infrastructure for SCMISudeep Holla
The SCMI is intended to allow OSPM to manage various functions that are provided by the hardware platform it is running on, including power and performance functions. SCMI provides two levels of abstraction, protocols and transports. Protocols define individual groups of system control and management messages. A protocol specification describes the messages that it supports. Transports describe the method by which protocol messages are communicated between agents and the platform. This patch adds basic infrastructure to manage the message allocation, initialisation, packing/unpacking and shared memory management. Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> Signed-off-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>