On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 4:07 PM, A.s. Dong <aisheng.d...@nxp.com> wrote: > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Sascha Hauer [mailto:s.ha...@pengutronix.de] > > Sent: Wednesday, July 11, 2018 3:55 PM > > To: A.s. Dong <aisheng.d...@nxp.com> > > Cc: linux-arm-ker...@lists.infradead.org; donga...@gmail.com; Jassi Brar > > <jassisinghb...@gmail.com>; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; Oleksij Rempel > > <o.rem...@pengutronix.de>; dl-linux-imx <linux-...@nxp.com>; > > ker...@pengutronix.de; Fabio Estevam <fabio.este...@nxp.com>; > > shawn...@kernel.org > > Subject: Re: [PATCH V4 3/5] mailbox: imx: add imx mu support > > > > On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 07:29:38AM +0000, A.s. Dong wrote: > > > Hi Sascha, > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Sascha Hauer [mailto:s.ha...@pengutronix.de] > > > > Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2018 10:20 PM > > > > To: A.s. Dong <aisheng.d...@nxp.com> > > > > Cc: linux-arm-ker...@lists.infradead.org; donga...@gmail.com; Jassi > > > > Brar <jassisinghb...@gmail.com>; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; > > > > Oleksij Rempel <o.rem...@pengutronix.de>; dl-linux-imx > > > > <linux-...@nxp.com>; ker...@pengutronix.de; Fabio Estevam > > > > <fabio.este...@nxp.com>; shawn...@kernel.org > > > > Subject: Re: [PATCH V4 3/5] mailbox: imx: add imx mu support > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > On Sun, Jul 08, 2018 at 10:56:55PM +0800, Dong Aisheng wrote: > > > > > This is used for i.MX multi core communication. > > > > > e.g. A core to SCU firmware(M core) on MX8. > > > > > > > > > > Tx is using polling mode while Rx is interrupt driven and schedule > > > > > a hrtimer to receive remain words if have more than > > > > > 4 words. > > > > > > > > You told us that using interrupts is not possible due to miserable > > > > performance, we then provided you a way with which you could poll. > > > > Why are you using interrupts now? > > > > > > > > > > Because mailbox framework does not support sync rx now, I think we do > > > not need to wait for that feature done first as it's independent and > > > separate features of framework. > > > > You can wait forever for this feature, nobody will add it for you. It's up > > to you > > to add support for that feature. Who else should add this feature if not > > you? > > And when will you add that feature if not now when you actually need it? > > It is common practice that you adjust the frameworks to your needs rather > > than working around them. > > > > I'm willing to add it. Just because you said Jassi already had the idea on > how to > Implement it and does not add much complexity. So I just want to see his > patches. > But if he did not work on it, I can also help on it. > I am not much aware of the history of this conversation... but it seems you need to make use of mbox_chan_ops.peek_data().
If not that, please let me know the requirement. Cheers!
