From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from smtp.codeaurora.org ([198.145.29.96]:43646 "EHLO smtp.codeaurora.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750806AbeDUHTr (ORCPT ); Sat, 21 Apr 2018 03:19:47 -0400 From: Kalle Valo To: Andres Rodriguez Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, mcgrof@kernel.org, alexdeucher@gmail.com, ckoenig.leichtzumerken@gmail.com, arend.vanspriel@broadcom.com, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 9/9] brcmfmac: use request_firmware_nowait2 to load firmware without warnings References: <20180417153307.3693-1-andresx7@gmail.com> <20180417153307.3693-10-andresx7@gmail.com> <87h8o6i36l.fsf@kamboji.qca.qualcomm.com> <65954790-8579-66ee-9b67-d44e18b4abb3@gmail.com> Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2018 10:19:42 +0300 In-Reply-To: <65954790-8579-66ee-9b67-d44e18b4abb3@gmail.com> (Andres Rodriguez's message of "Fri, 20 Apr 2018 15:33:36 -0400") Message-ID: <87efj9f2lt.fsf@kamboji.qca.qualcomm.com> (sfid-20180421_092002_955449_B2C8203A) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Andres Rodriguez writes: >>> + fwctx->nvram_name, fwctx->dev, >>> + GFP_KERNEL, fwctx, >>> brcmf_fw_request_nvram_done); >>> /* pass NULL to nvram callback for bcm47xx fallback */ >>> @@ -547,7 +548,7 @@ int brcmf_fw_get_firmwares_pcie(struct device *dev, u16 flags, >>> fwctx->domain_nr = domain_nr; >>> fwctx->bus_nr = bus_nr; >>> - return request_firmware_nowait(THIS_MODULE, true, code, dev, >>> + return request_firmware_nowait2(THIS_MODULE, true, false, code, dev, >>> GFP_KERNEL, fwctx, >>> brcmf_fw_request_code_done); >>> } >> >> Also the number two in the function name is not really telling anything. >> I think that something like request_firmware_nowait_nowarn() would be >> better, even if it's so ugly. >> > > The 2 is meant to signify that this is an new version of the api with > different parameters. Ah, I missed that. I didn't have time to review your patches in detail, just looked at the wireless patches. > I don't think we need to codify into the name what the new parameters > mean (mostly because when a 2 version of an api is implemented, usage > of the original version tends to be discouraged). Yeah, makes sense now. -- Kalle Valo From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Google-Smtp-Source: AIpwx48UK4ar34jTaIHq3SEbLnaLdiv7I1YRo1eWSd1PLqRUi0rKqWE5ZN5RgS7Uqcfon+r665Jv ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1524295187; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=Vp2RZuxXMJQKuG1KPo0MigLx1yo2c64MtKVCCd+a+eDKOEkCA0SwZcyke0wyuz3FZh dlpi4nSQTk89pcMMioyR+JGxXmubsQHlSb+LLbL503uDQ52oIV664KHQf2GOuImjV/5f JgWznAWCfJu5Nqw70C8AIOhTkce3tTp5zSWnVww5/FK/yyRI5oUAYPrMtSPI5onLLEGx OPC8oBG6hHMII+MwDB1cEHrWLjM4GGoIiiflpVOut/+4mT19FBg4veSpFF2Qmv8YkkA0 HffMyLpa8Qv8yi38sgiY6CpY4iVCQVD4ewmfuDEjeW81KVPNaJXNn8T3HC81i8IMgIbz FRcw== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=mime-version:user-agent:message-id:in-reply-to:date:references :subject:cc:to:from:dmarc-filter:dkim-signature:dkim-signature :arc-authentication-results; bh=V6GcmckNlJFYkeA7D46UCHdm8BW+DQJ2cYKNH/BTP5M=; b=A47BkJpUY7VkCeeRvOGf320/zcbyr2DJMEAuDGQFQSfSsOZ8+OHmJNTyd9bW2JN84W HRnEUofpbxp75nTDenKQKCONjVKMOfxiu6yZHS1nrcT6w6C0SIp9tMAJ0uldFJ13xA/R EHIUwOh+ffHVYoCiGfvZ8TJZfpNQ0FTyH4OWONb2gUa47WMpFoi4yvO3tzQipTJZlvRp davLlZo8hhRebOSY8Ou9QHTsFbmI2GWPB4YL0TWHpsHws9JiuQU31skp4Wk84EUTugc3 mWs68nckMu9jyKj/PiZxDkecoPR08sqaRsUYHgG55x8mWjKOJL5hN5cZCf6+BrXVxpJ5 0WjQ== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@codeaurora.org header.s=default header.b=mTqBrG1A; dkim=pass header.i=@codeaurora.org header.s=default header.b=mTqBrG1A; spf=pass (google.com: domain of kvalo@codeaurora.org designates 198.145.29.96 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=kvalo@codeaurora.org Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@codeaurora.org header.s=default header.b=mTqBrG1A; dkim=pass header.i=@codeaurora.org header.s=default header.b=mTqBrG1A; spf=pass (google.com: domain of kvalo@codeaurora.org designates 198.145.29.96 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=kvalo@codeaurora.org DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 smtp.codeaurora.org 6BCB9602B8 Authentication-Results: pdx-caf-mail.web.codeaurora.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=codeaurora.org Authentication-Results: pdx-caf-mail.web.codeaurora.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=kvalo@codeaurora.org From: Kalle Valo To: Andres Rodriguez Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, mcgrof@kernel.org, alexdeucher@gmail.com, ckoenig.leichtzumerken@gmail.com, arend.vanspriel@broadcom.com, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 9/9] brcmfmac: use request_firmware_nowait2 to load firmware without warnings References: <20180417153307.3693-1-andresx7@gmail.com> <20180417153307.3693-10-andresx7@gmail.com> <87h8o6i36l.fsf@kamboji.qca.qualcomm.com> <65954790-8579-66ee-9b67-d44e18b4abb3@gmail.com> Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2018 10:19:42 +0300 In-Reply-To: <65954790-8579-66ee-9b67-d44e18b4abb3@gmail.com> (Andres Rodriguez's message of "Fri, 20 Apr 2018 15:33:36 -0400") Message-ID: <87efj9f2lt.fsf@kamboji.qca.qualcomm.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.5 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-getmail-retrieved-from-mailbox: INBOX X-GMAIL-THRID: =?utf-8?q?1598008020626065507?= X-GMAIL-MSGID: =?utf-8?q?1598339349984202730?= X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Andres Rodriguez writes: >>> + fwctx->nvram_name, fwctx->dev, >>> + GFP_KERNEL, fwctx, >>> brcmf_fw_request_nvram_done); >>> /* pass NULL to nvram callback for bcm47xx fallback */ >>> @@ -547,7 +548,7 @@ int brcmf_fw_get_firmwares_pcie(struct device *dev, u16 flags, >>> fwctx->domain_nr = domain_nr; >>> fwctx->bus_nr = bus_nr; >>> - return request_firmware_nowait(THIS_MODULE, true, code, dev, >>> + return request_firmware_nowait2(THIS_MODULE, true, false, code, dev, >>> GFP_KERNEL, fwctx, >>> brcmf_fw_request_code_done); >>> } >> >> Also the number two in the function name is not really telling anything. >> I think that something like request_firmware_nowait_nowarn() would be >> better, even if it's so ugly. >> > > The 2 is meant to signify that this is an new version of the api with > different parameters. Ah, I missed that. I didn't have time to review your patches in detail, just looked at the wireless patches. > I don't think we need to codify into the name what the new parameters > mean (mostly because when a 2 version of an api is implemented, usage > of the original version tends to be discouraged). Yeah, makes sense now. -- Kalle Valo