Re: [PATCH] remoteproc: xlnx: do not send new mailbox notification

[Shah, Tanmay]

On 3/16/2026 10:18 AM, Mathieu Poirier wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 19, 2026 at 02:43:30PM -0800, Tanmay Shah wrote:
>> Only write a new message to the tx mbox queue if slot is available in
>> the tx queue. If queue is full, then do not send new mbox notification.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Tanmay Shah <tanmay.shah@xxxxxxx>
>> ---
>>
>> Depends on: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-remoteproc/20260209234430.512492-1-jassisinghbrar@xxxxxxxxx/T/#u
>>
>>  drivers/remoteproc/xlnx_r5_remoteproc.c | 5 ++++-
>>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/xlnx_r5_remoteproc.c b/drivers/remoteproc/xlnx_r5_remoteproc.c
>> index bd619a6c42aa..622de733c929 100644
>> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/xlnx_r5_remoteproc.c
>> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/xlnx_r5_remoteproc.c
>> @@ -332,7 +332,10 @@ static void zynqmp_r5_rproc_kick(struct rproc *rproc, int vqid)
>>  	int ret;
>>  
>>  	ipi = r5_core->ipi;
>> -	if (!ipi)
>> +	if (!ipi || !ipi->tx_chan)
>> +		return;
>> +
>> +	if (mbox_chan_tx_slots_available(ipi->tx_chan) == 0)
>>  		return;
>>
> 
> Is see 3 options to handle this situation:
> 
> (1) I can provide an RB for this patch and Jassi picks it up in his tree.  The
> downside is that if a subsequent submission conflicts with this change, we have
> to wait for the next cycle.  In that case:
> 
> Reviewed-by: Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@xxxxxxxxxx>
> 
> (2) Jassi provides me with a pull request to bring the patch in the
> rproc-next tree.
> 

Hi Mathieu,

I am curious what do you mean by pull request?

Jassi had included remoteproc mailing list when sent the original patch
here:
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-remoteproc/20260209234430.512492-1-jassisinghbrar@xxxxxxxxx/

Since then no other change was introduced in that patch. Isn't it enough
for it to pick-up for rproc-next? I am just asking from the process
point of view, what should have been done differently?

If all looks good, then I think you can pick up original patch from him
for rproc-next, as the same patch got merged in the linux-next.

Thanks,
Tanmay

> (3) I pick it up in the rproc-next tree in 5 weeks when v7.1-rc1 comes out.
>   
>>  	mb_msg = (struct zynqmp_ipi_message *)ipi->tx_mc_buf;
>>
>> base-commit: 462799c088e71b2b8a511c2a9649420fcb569ab7
>> -- 
>> 2.34.1
>>