Hi,
Bin Gao <bin....@linux.intel.com> writes:
>> > +int pd_sink_queue_msg(struct pd_sink_msg *msg)
>> > +{
>> > + unsigned long flags;
>> > + struct pd_sink_port *port;
>> > +
>> > + if (msg->port < 0 || msg->port >= MAX_NR_SINK_PORTS) {
>> > + pr_err("Invalid port number\n");
>> > + return -EINVAL;
>> > + }
>> > +
>> > + port = sink_ports[msg->port];
>> > +
>> > + spin_lock_irqsave(&port->rx_lock, flags);
>> > + list_add_tail(&msg->list, &port->rx_list);
>> > + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&port->rx_lock, flags);
>> > +
>> > + queue_work(port->rx_wq, &port->rx_work);
>>
>> can we really queue several messages at a time? It seems unfeasible to
>> me. It's not like we can queue several power request in a role. Why do
>> you need this workqueue? Why don't you process message here, in place?
> Some Type-C chargers send two messages in a short duration(less than 1 ms),
> e.g. a SOURCE_CAPABILITY follows the previous SOURCE_CAPABILITY, or a
> GET_SINK_CAPABILITY follows a previous SOURCE_CAPABILITY, etc. Queuing
> message to PD stack by Type-C phy driver typically happens in a interrupt
> context. So in this case a nested interrupt may happen. Our whole PD
> stack while processing one message is not re-entrant so the nested
> interrupt would cause a problem.keep interrupts masked for as long as necessary until your message is processed. -- balbi
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
