From: Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@linaro.org>
To: Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@linaro.org>
Cc: ohad@wizery.com, loic.pallardy@st.com, arnaud.pouliquen@st.com,
s-anna@ti.com, linux-remoteproc@vger.kernel.org, corbet@lwn.net,
linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 02/14] remoteproc: Introduce function rproc_alloc_internals()
Date: Tue, 5 May 2020 15:31:58 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200505223158.GB2329931@builder.lan> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200424200135.28825-3-mathieu.poirier@linaro.org>
On Fri 24 Apr 13:01 PDT 2020, Mathieu Poirier wrote:
> In scenarios where the remote processor's lifecycle is entirely
> managed by another entity there is no point in allocating memory for
> a firmware name since it will never be used. The same goes for a core
> set of operations.
>
> As such introduce function rproc_alloc_internals() to decide if the
> allocation of a firmware name and the core operations need to be done.
> That way rproc_alloc() can be kept as clean as possible.
>
> Signed-off-by: Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@linaro.org>
> ---
> drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c | 31 +++++++++++++++++++++++-----
> 1 file changed, 26 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> index 448262470fc7..1b4756909584 100644
> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> @@ -2076,6 +2076,30 @@ static int rproc_alloc_ops(struct rproc *rproc, const struct rproc_ops *ops)
> return 0;
> }
>
> +static int rproc_alloc_internals(struct rproc *rproc,
> + const struct rproc_ops *ops,
> + const char *name, const char *firmware)
> +{
> + int ret;
> +
> + /*
> + * In scenarios where the remote processor's lifecycle is entirely
> + * managed by another entity there is no point in carrying a set
> + * of operations that will never be used.
> + *
> + * And since no firmware will ever be loaded, there is no point in
> + * allocating memory for it either.
While this is true, I would expect that there are cases where the
remoteproc has ops but no firmware.
How about splitting this decision already now; i.e. moving the if(!ops)
to rproc_alloc_ops() and perhaps only allocate firmware if ops->load is
specified?
Regards,
Bjorn
> + */
> + if (!ops)
> + return 0;
> +
> + ret = rproc_alloc_firmware(rproc, name, firmware);
> + if (ret)
> + return ret;
> +
> + return rproc_alloc_ops(rproc, ops);
> +}
> +
> /**
> * rproc_alloc() - allocate a remote processor handle
> * @dev: the underlying device
> @@ -2105,7 +2129,7 @@ struct rproc *rproc_alloc(struct device *dev, const char *name,
> {
> struct rproc *rproc;
>
> - if (!dev || !name || !ops)
> + if (!dev || !name)
> return NULL;
>
> rproc = kzalloc(sizeof(struct rproc) + len, GFP_KERNEL);
> @@ -2128,10 +2152,7 @@ struct rproc *rproc_alloc(struct device *dev, const char *name,
> if (!rproc->name)
> goto put_device;
>
> - if (rproc_alloc_firmware(rproc, name, firmware))
> - goto put_device;
> -
> - if (rproc_alloc_ops(rproc, ops))
> + if (rproc_alloc_internals(rproc, ops, name, firmware))
> goto put_device;
>
> /* Assign a unique device index and name */
> --
> 2.20.1
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-05-05 22:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 64+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-04-24 20:01 [PATCH v3 00/14] remoteproc: Add support for synchronisaton with rproc Mathieu Poirier
2020-04-24 20:01 ` [PATCH v3 01/14] remoteproc: Make core operations optional Mathieu Poirier
2020-04-28 16:18 ` Arnaud POULIQUEN
2020-04-30 19:39 ` Mathieu Poirier
2020-05-05 22:16 ` Bjorn Andersson
2020-05-08 19:09 ` Mathieu Poirier
2020-04-24 20:01 ` [PATCH v3 02/14] remoteproc: Introduce function rproc_alloc_internals() Mathieu Poirier
2020-05-05 22:31 ` Bjorn Andersson [this message]
2020-05-08 19:37 ` Mathieu Poirier
2020-04-24 20:01 ` [PATCH v3 03/14] remoteproc: Add new operation and flags for synchronistation Mathieu Poirier
2020-04-28 16:38 ` Arnaud POULIQUEN
2020-04-30 19:49 ` Mathieu Poirier
2020-05-06 0:22 ` Bjorn Andersson
2020-05-08 21:01 ` Mathieu Poirier
2020-05-14 1:32 ` Bjorn Andersson
2020-05-15 19:24 ` Mathieu Poirier
2020-05-19 0:55 ` Bjorn Andersson
2020-05-20 22:06 ` Mathieu Poirier
2020-05-21 5:21 ` Bjorn Andersson
2020-05-21 21:55 ` Mathieu Poirier
2020-04-24 20:01 ` [PATCH v3 04/14] remoteproc: Refactor function rproc_boot() Mathieu Poirier
2020-04-24 20:01 ` [PATCH v3 05/14] remoteproc: Refactor function rproc_fw_boot() Mathieu Poirier
2020-05-06 0:33 ` Bjorn Andersson
2020-05-08 21:27 ` Mathieu Poirier
2020-05-14 2:10 ` Bjorn Andersson
2020-05-15 19:46 ` Mathieu Poirier
2020-05-19 0:22 ` Bjorn Andersson
2020-04-24 20:01 ` [PATCH v3 06/14] remoteproc: Refactor function rproc_trigger_auto_boot() Mathieu Poirier
2020-04-28 17:00 ` Arnaud POULIQUEN
2020-04-24 20:01 ` [PATCH v3 07/14] remoteproc: Introducting new start and stop functions Mathieu Poirier
2020-05-06 0:42 ` Bjorn Andersson
2020-04-24 20:01 ` [PATCH v3 08/14] remoteproc: Call core functions based on synchronisation flag Mathieu Poirier
2020-04-28 17:27 ` Arnaud POULIQUEN
2020-04-30 19:57 ` Mathieu Poirier
2020-05-04 11:14 ` Arnaud POULIQUEN
2020-05-05 22:10 ` Mathieu Poirier
2020-04-24 20:01 ` [PATCH v3 09/14] remoteproc: Deal with synchronisation when crashing Mathieu Poirier
2020-04-29 7:44 ` Arnaud POULIQUEN
2020-04-30 20:11 ` Mathieu Poirier
2020-05-06 1:01 ` Bjorn Andersson
2020-05-08 21:47 ` Mathieu Poirier
2020-04-24 20:01 ` [PATCH v3 10/14] remoteproc: Deal with synchronisation when shutting down Mathieu Poirier
2020-04-29 8:19 ` Arnaud POULIQUEN
2020-04-30 20:23 ` Mathieu Poirier
2020-05-04 11:34 ` Arnaud POULIQUEN
2020-05-05 22:03 ` Mathieu Poirier
2020-05-06 7:51 ` Arnaud POULIQUEN
2020-05-06 1:10 ` Bjorn Andersson
2020-04-24 20:01 ` [PATCH v3 11/14] remoteproc: Deal with synchronisation when changing FW image Mathieu Poirier
2020-04-29 8:52 ` Arnaud POULIQUEN
2020-04-30 20:32 ` Mathieu Poirier
2020-05-06 1:27 ` Bjorn Andersson
2020-04-24 20:01 ` [PATCH v3 12/14] remoteproc: Introducing function rproc_set_state_machine() Mathieu Poirier
2020-04-29 9:22 ` Arnaud POULIQUEN
2020-04-29 14:38 ` Arnaud POULIQUEN
2020-04-30 20:51 ` Mathieu Poirier
2020-05-04 12:00 ` Arnaud POULIQUEN
2020-04-30 20:42 ` Mathieu Poirier
2020-05-04 11:57 ` Arnaud POULIQUEN
2020-05-05 21:43 ` Mathieu Poirier
2020-04-24 20:01 ` [PATCH v3 13/14] remoteproc: Document " Mathieu Poirier
2020-04-24 20:01 ` [PATCH v3 14/14] remoteproc: Expose synchronisation flags via debugfs Mathieu Poirier
2020-05-18 13:28 ` [PATCH v3 00/14] remoteproc: Add support for synchronisaton with rproc Peng Fan
2020-05-18 16:29 ` 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=20200505223158.GB2329931@builder.lan \
--to=bjorn.andersson@linaro.org \
--cc=arnaud.pouliquen@st.com \
--cc=corbet@lwn.net \
--cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-remoteproc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=loic.pallardy@st.com \
--cc=mathieu.poirier@linaro.org \
--cc=ohad@wizery.com \
--cc=s-anna@ti.com \
/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: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).