From: Suman Anna <s-anna@ti.com> To: Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@linaro.org> Cc: Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@linaro.org>, Lokesh Vutla <lokeshvutla@ti.com>, Tero Kristo <kristo@kernel.org>, <linux-remoteproc@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6] remoteproc: Add support for detach-only during shutdown Date: Fri, 28 May 2021 11:40:02 -0500 [thread overview] Message-ID: <da468002-580c-de1a-dcf4-275d57bb7ac7@ti.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <YLBtbHevzyxT4RTK@builder.lan> Hi Bjorn, On 5/27/21 11:11 PM, Bjorn Andersson wrote: > On Fri 21 May 19:03 CDT 2021, Suman Anna wrote: > >> The remoteproc core has support for both stopping and detaching a >> remote processor that was attached to previously, through both the >> remoteproc sysfs and cdev interfaces. The rproc_shutdown() though >> unconditionally only uses the stop functionality at present. This >> may not be the default desired functionality for all the remoteproc >> platform drivers. >> >> Introduce a new rproc state flag 'detach_on_shutdown' that individual >> remoteproc drivers can set to only allow detach in rproc_shutdown() >> that would have been invoked when the driver is uninstalled, so that >> remote processor continues to run undisturbed even after the driver >> removal. >> > > I dislike the introduction of knobs for everything and would much rather > see that we define some sound defaults. Can we make shutdown just do > detach() if that's supported otherwise stop(). > I maybe missing your point, but the change in remoteproc_core below exactly does that, right? Are you saying drop the checks in remoteproc_cdev and remoteproc_sysfs? The asymmetry did bug me as well, but it is already existing even before this patch. I personally would have preferred a cleaner and symmetrical attach, start, stop, detach, but existing code has overloaded attach into start (keys off by RPROC_OFFLINE/RPROC_DETACHED) while introducing a separate detach from stop. I have retained the meaning of stop as shutdown from userspace interface perspective, but enforcing the checks for detach only remoteprocs. The logic in rproc_shutdown is for driver paths. > This still allows userspace to explicitly stop the detachable remoteproc > before shutdown, if for some reason that's what you want... This is the existing behavior and the difference between stop and detach. That behavior is maintained for remoteprocs not setting the detach_on_shutdown flag. I am only restricting the behavior for those that set it. Mathieu, Your thoughts on this? regards Suman > > Regards, > Bjorn > >> Signed-off-by: Suman Anna <s-anna@ti.com> >> --- >> drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_cdev.c | 7 +++++++ >> drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c | 5 ++++- >> drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_sysfs.c | 6 ++++++ >> include/linux/remoteproc.h | 3 +++ >> 4 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_cdev.c b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_cdev.c >> index 0b8a84c04f76..473467711a09 100644 >> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_cdev.c >> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_cdev.c >> @@ -42,6 +42,13 @@ static ssize_t rproc_cdev_write(struct file *filp, const char __user *buf, size_ >> rproc->state != RPROC_ATTACHED) >> return -EINVAL; >> >> + if (rproc->state == RPROC_ATTACHED && >> + rproc->detach_on_shutdown) { >> + dev_err(&rproc->dev, >> + "stop not supported for this rproc, use detach\n"); >> + return -EINVAL; >> + } >> + >> rproc_shutdown(rproc); >> } else if (!strncmp(cmd, "detach", len)) { >> if (rproc->state != RPROC_ATTACHED) >> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c >> index 6019f46001c8..e8ab3eb41f00 100644 >> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c >> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c >> @@ -2074,7 +2074,10 @@ void rproc_shutdown(struct rproc *rproc) >> if (!atomic_dec_and_test(&rproc->power)) >> goto out; >> >> - ret = rproc_stop(rproc, false); >> + if (rproc->detach_on_shutdown && rproc->state == RPROC_ATTACHED) >> + ret = __rproc_detach(rproc); >> + else >> + ret = rproc_stop(rproc, false); >> if (ret) { >> atomic_inc(&rproc->power); >> goto out; >> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_sysfs.c b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_sysfs.c >> index ea8b89f97d7b..1785fbcb1075 100644 >> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_sysfs.c >> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_sysfs.c >> @@ -206,6 +206,12 @@ static ssize_t state_store(struct device *dev, >> rproc->state != RPROC_ATTACHED) >> return -EINVAL; >> >> + if (rproc->state == RPROC_ATTACHED && >> + rproc->detach_on_shutdown) { >> + dev_err(&rproc->dev, "stop not supported for this rproc, use detach\n"); >> + return -EINVAL; >> + } >> + >> rproc_shutdown(rproc); >> } else if (sysfs_streq(buf, "detach")) { >> if (rproc->state != RPROC_ATTACHED) >> diff --git a/include/linux/remoteproc.h b/include/linux/remoteproc.h >> index 42a1f30e33a7..35ef921676a1 100644 >> --- a/include/linux/remoteproc.h >> +++ b/include/linux/remoteproc.h >> @@ -530,6 +530,8 @@ struct rproc_dump_segment { >> * @elf_machine: firmware ELF machine >> * @cdev: character device of the rproc >> * @cdev_put_on_release: flag to indicate if remoteproc should be shutdown on @char_dev release >> + * @detach_on_shutdown: flag to indicate if remoteproc cannot be shutdown in >> + * attached state and _only_ support detach >> */ >> struct rproc { >> struct list_head node; >> @@ -569,6 +571,7 @@ struct rproc { >> u16 elf_machine; >> struct cdev cdev; >> bool cdev_put_on_release; >> + bool detach_on_shutdown; >> }; >> >> /** >> -- >> 2.30.1 >>
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Suman Anna <s-anna@ti.com> To: Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@linaro.org> Cc: Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@linaro.org>, Lokesh Vutla <lokeshvutla@ti.com>, Tero Kristo <kristo@kernel.org>, <linux-remoteproc@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6] remoteproc: Add support for detach-only during shutdown Date: Fri, 28 May 2021 11:40:02 -0500 [thread overview] Message-ID: <da468002-580c-de1a-dcf4-275d57bb7ac7@ti.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <YLBtbHevzyxT4RTK@builder.lan> Hi Bjorn, On 5/27/21 11:11 PM, Bjorn Andersson wrote: > On Fri 21 May 19:03 CDT 2021, Suman Anna wrote: > >> The remoteproc core has support for both stopping and detaching a >> remote processor that was attached to previously, through both the >> remoteproc sysfs and cdev interfaces. The rproc_shutdown() though >> unconditionally only uses the stop functionality at present. This >> may not be the default desired functionality for all the remoteproc >> platform drivers. >> >> Introduce a new rproc state flag 'detach_on_shutdown' that individual >> remoteproc drivers can set to only allow detach in rproc_shutdown() >> that would have been invoked when the driver is uninstalled, so that >> remote processor continues to run undisturbed even after the driver >> removal. >> > > I dislike the introduction of knobs for everything and would much rather > see that we define some sound defaults. Can we make shutdown just do > detach() if that's supported otherwise stop(). > I maybe missing your point, but the change in remoteproc_core below exactly does that, right? Are you saying drop the checks in remoteproc_cdev and remoteproc_sysfs? The asymmetry did bug me as well, but it is already existing even before this patch. I personally would have preferred a cleaner and symmetrical attach, start, stop, detach, but existing code has overloaded attach into start (keys off by RPROC_OFFLINE/RPROC_DETACHED) while introducing a separate detach from stop. I have retained the meaning of stop as shutdown from userspace interface perspective, but enforcing the checks for detach only remoteprocs. The logic in rproc_shutdown is for driver paths. > This still allows userspace to explicitly stop the detachable remoteproc > before shutdown, if for some reason that's what you want... This is the existing behavior and the difference between stop and detach. That behavior is maintained for remoteprocs not setting the detach_on_shutdown flag. I am only restricting the behavior for those that set it. Mathieu, Your thoughts on this? regards Suman > > Regards, > Bjorn > >> Signed-off-by: Suman Anna <s-anna@ti.com> >> --- >> drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_cdev.c | 7 +++++++ >> drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c | 5 ++++- >> drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_sysfs.c | 6 ++++++ >> include/linux/remoteproc.h | 3 +++ >> 4 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_cdev.c b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_cdev.c >> index 0b8a84c04f76..473467711a09 100644 >> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_cdev.c >> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_cdev.c >> @@ -42,6 +42,13 @@ static ssize_t rproc_cdev_write(struct file *filp, const char __user *buf, size_ >> rproc->state != RPROC_ATTACHED) >> return -EINVAL; >> >> + if (rproc->state == RPROC_ATTACHED && >> + rproc->detach_on_shutdown) { >> + dev_err(&rproc->dev, >> + "stop not supported for this rproc, use detach\n"); >> + return -EINVAL; >> + } >> + >> rproc_shutdown(rproc); >> } else if (!strncmp(cmd, "detach", len)) { >> if (rproc->state != RPROC_ATTACHED) >> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c >> index 6019f46001c8..e8ab3eb41f00 100644 >> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c >> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c >> @@ -2074,7 +2074,10 @@ void rproc_shutdown(struct rproc *rproc) >> if (!atomic_dec_and_test(&rproc->power)) >> goto out; >> >> - ret = rproc_stop(rproc, false); >> + if (rproc->detach_on_shutdown && rproc->state == RPROC_ATTACHED) >> + ret = __rproc_detach(rproc); >> + else >> + ret = rproc_stop(rproc, false); >> if (ret) { >> atomic_inc(&rproc->power); >> goto out; >> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_sysfs.c b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_sysfs.c >> index ea8b89f97d7b..1785fbcb1075 100644 >> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_sysfs.c >> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_sysfs.c >> @@ -206,6 +206,12 @@ static ssize_t state_store(struct device *dev, >> rproc->state != RPROC_ATTACHED) >> return -EINVAL; >> >> + if (rproc->state == RPROC_ATTACHED && >> + rproc->detach_on_shutdown) { >> + dev_err(&rproc->dev, "stop not supported for this rproc, use detach\n"); >> + return -EINVAL; >> + } >> + >> rproc_shutdown(rproc); >> } else if (sysfs_streq(buf, "detach")) { >> if (rproc->state != RPROC_ATTACHED) >> diff --git a/include/linux/remoteproc.h b/include/linux/remoteproc.h >> index 42a1f30e33a7..35ef921676a1 100644 >> --- a/include/linux/remoteproc.h >> +++ b/include/linux/remoteproc.h >> @@ -530,6 +530,8 @@ struct rproc_dump_segment { >> * @elf_machine: firmware ELF machine >> * @cdev: character device of the rproc >> * @cdev_put_on_release: flag to indicate if remoteproc should be shutdown on @char_dev release >> + * @detach_on_shutdown: flag to indicate if remoteproc cannot be shutdown in >> + * attached state and _only_ support detach >> */ >> struct rproc { >> struct list_head node; >> @@ -569,6 +571,7 @@ struct rproc { >> u16 elf_machine; >> struct cdev cdev; >> bool cdev_put_on_release; >> + bool detach_on_shutdown; >> }; >> >> /** >> -- >> 2.30.1 >> _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-05-28 16:40 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 46+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2021-05-22 0:03 [PATCH 0/6] K3 R5F & DSP IPC-only mode support Suman Anna 2021-05-22 0:03 ` Suman Anna 2021-05-22 0:03 ` [PATCH 1/6] remoteproc: Introduce rproc_detach_device() wrapper Suman Anna 2021-05-22 0:03 ` Suman Anna 2021-05-28 4:17 ` Bjorn Andersson 2021-05-28 4:17 ` Bjorn Andersson 2021-05-28 16:17 ` Suman Anna 2021-05-28 16:17 ` Suman Anna 2021-05-22 0:03 ` [PATCH 2/6] remoteproc: Add support for detach-only during shutdown Suman Anna 2021-05-22 0:03 ` Suman Anna 2021-05-28 4:11 ` Bjorn Andersson 2021-05-28 4:11 ` Bjorn Andersson 2021-05-28 16:40 ` Suman Anna [this message] 2021-05-28 16:40 ` Suman Anna 2021-06-01 17:15 ` Mathieu Poirier 2021-06-01 17:15 ` Mathieu Poirier 2021-05-22 0:03 ` [PATCH 3/6] remoteproc: k3-r5: Refactor mbox request code in start Suman Anna 2021-05-22 0:03 ` Suman Anna 2021-06-01 17:22 ` Mathieu Poirier 2021-06-01 17:22 ` Mathieu Poirier 2021-05-22 0:03 ` [PATCH 4/6] remoteproc: k3-r5: Add support for IPC-only mode for all R5Fs Suman Anna 2021-05-22 0:03 ` Suman Anna 2021-06-01 17:51 ` Mathieu Poirier 2021-06-01 17:51 ` Mathieu Poirier 2021-06-02 15:53 ` Mathieu Poirier 2021-06-02 15:53 ` Mathieu Poirier 2021-05-22 0:03 ` [PATCH 5/6] remoteproc: k3-dsp: Refactor mbox request code in start Suman Anna 2021-05-22 0:03 ` Suman Anna 2021-06-02 16:04 ` Mathieu Poirier 2021-06-02 16:04 ` Mathieu Poirier 2021-05-22 0:03 ` [PATCH 6/6] remoteproc: k3-dsp: Add support for IPC-only mode for all K3 DSPs Suman Anna 2021-05-22 0:03 ` Suman Anna 2021-05-28 4:36 ` Bjorn Andersson 2021-05-28 4:36 ` Bjorn Andersson 2021-05-28 17:04 ` Suman Anna 2021-05-28 17:04 ` Suman Anna 2021-06-02 16:07 ` Mathieu Poirier 2021-06-02 16:07 ` Mathieu Poirier 2021-06-03 14:57 ` Suman Anna 2021-06-03 14:57 ` Suman Anna 2021-06-07 16:33 ` Mathieu Poirier 2021-06-07 16:33 ` Mathieu Poirier 2021-06-16 15:00 ` Suman Anna 2021-06-16 15:00 ` Suman Anna 2021-06-22 22:51 ` Mathieu Poirier 2021-06-22 22:51 ` Mathieu Poirier
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=da468002-580c-de1a-dcf4-275d57bb7ac7@ti.com \ --to=s-anna@ti.com \ --cc=bjorn.andersson@linaro.org \ --cc=kristo@kernel.org \ --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \ --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=linux-remoteproc@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=lokeshvutla@ti.com \ --cc=mathieu.poirier@linaro.org \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.