linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jeffrey Hugo <jhugo@codeaurora.org>
To: Loic Poulain <loic.poulain@linaro.org>,
	Hemant Kumar <hemantk@codeaurora.org>
Cc: Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@linaro.org>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	linux-arm-msm <linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org>,
	open list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Bhaumik Bhatt <bbhatt@codeaurora.org>,
	Network Development <netdev@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v13 4/4] bus: mhi: Add userspace client interface driver
Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2020 10:37:00 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1247e32e-ed67-de6b-81ec-3bde9ad93250@codeaurora.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAMZdPi8mUV5cFs-76K3kg=hN8ht2SKjJwzbJH-+VH4Y8QabcHQ@mail.gmail.com>

On 12/1/2020 10:36 AM, Loic Poulain wrote:
> On Tue, 1 Dec 2020 at 02:16, Hemant Kumar <hemantk@codeaurora.org> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Loic,
>>
>> On 11/30/20 10:22 AM, Loic Poulain wrote:
>>> On Sat, 28 Nov 2020 at 04:26, Hemant Kumar <hemantk@codeaurora.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> This MHI client driver allows userspace clients to transfer
>>>> raw data between MHI device and host using standard file operations.
>>>> Driver instantiates UCI device object which is associated to device
>>>> file node. UCI device object instantiates UCI channel object when device
>>>> file node is opened. UCI channel object is used to manage MHI channels
>>>> by calling MHI core APIs for read and write operations. MHI channels
>>>> are started as part of device open(). MHI channels remain in start
>>>> state until last release() is called on UCI device file node. Device
>>>> file node is created with format
>>>
>>> [...]
>>>
>>>> +struct uci_chan {
>>>> +       struct uci_dev *udev;
>>>> +       wait_queue_head_t ul_wq;
>>>> +
>>>> +       /* ul channel lock to synchronize multiple writes */
>>>> +       struct mutex write_lock;
>>>> +
>>>> +       wait_queue_head_t dl_wq;
>>>> +
>>>> +       /* dl channel lock to synchronize multiple reads */
>>>> +       struct mutex read_lock;
>>>> +
>>>> +       /*
>>>> +        * protects pending list in bh context, channel release, read and
>>>> +        * poll
>>>> +        */
>>>> +       spinlock_t dl_pending_lock;
>>>> +
>>>> +       struct list_head dl_pending;
>>>> +       struct uci_buf *cur_buf;
>>>> +       size_t dl_size;
>>>> +       struct kref ref_count;
>>>> +};
>>>
>>> [...]
>>>
>>>> + * struct uci_dev - MHI UCI device
>>>> + * @minor: UCI device node minor number
>>>> + * @mhi_dev: associated mhi device object
>>>> + * @uchan: UCI uplink and downlink channel object
>>>> + * @mtu: max TRE buffer length
>>>> + * @enabled: Flag to track the state of the UCI device
>>>> + * @lock: mutex lock to manage uchan object
>>>> + * @ref_count: uci_dev reference count
>>>> + */
>>>> +struct uci_dev {
>>>> +       unsigned int minor;
>>>> +       struct mhi_device *mhi_dev;
>>>> +       struct uci_chan *uchan;
>>>
>>> Why a pointer to uci_chan and not just plainly integrating the
>>> structure here, AFAIU uci_chan describes the channels and is just a
>>> subpart of uci_dev. That would reduce the number of dynamic
>>> allocations you manage and the extra kref. do you even need a separate
>>> structure for this?
>>
>> This goes back to one of my patch versions i tried to address concern
>> from Greg. Since we need to ref count the channel as well as the uci
>> device i decoupled the two objects and used two reference counts for two
>> different objects.
> 
> What Greg complained about is the two kref in the same structure and
> that you were using kref as an open() counter. But splitting your
> struct in two in order to keep the two kref does not make the much
> code better (and simpler). I'm still a bit puzzled about the driver
> complexity, it's supposed to be just a passthrough interface to MHI
> after all.
> 
> I would suggest several changes, that IMHO would simplify reviewing:
> - Use only one structure representing the 'uci' context (uci_dev)
> - Keep the read path simple (mhi_uci_read), do no use an intermediate
> cur_buf pointer, only dequeue the buffer when it is fully consumed.
> - As I commented before, take care of the dl_pending list access
> concurrency, even in wait_event.
> - You don't need to count the number of open() calls, AFAIK,
> mhi_prepare_for_transfer() simply fails if channels are already
> started...

Unless I missed something, you seem to have ignored the root issue that 
Hemant needs to solve, which is when to call 
mhi_unprepare_for_transfer().  You can't just call that when close() is 
called because there might be multiple users, and each one is going to 
trigger a close(), so you need to know how many close() instances to 
expect, and only call mhi_unprepare_for_transfer() for the last one.

-- 
Jeffrey Hugo
Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. is a member of the
Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project.

  reply	other threads:[~2020-12-01 17:38 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-11-28  3:26 [PATCH v13 0/4] userspace MHI client interface driver Hemant Kumar
2020-11-28  3:26 ` [PATCH v13 1/4] bus: mhi: core: Add helper API to return number of free TREs Hemant Kumar
2020-11-28  3:26 ` [PATCH v13 2/4] bus: mhi: core: Move MHI_MAX_MTU to external header file Hemant Kumar
2020-11-28  3:26 ` [PATCH v13 3/4] docs: Add documentation for userspace client interface Hemant Kumar
2020-11-28  3:26 ` [PATCH v13 4/4] bus: mhi: Add userspace client interface driver Hemant Kumar
2020-11-28  6:11   ` Manivannan Sadhasivam
2020-12-01  1:08     ` Hemant Kumar
2020-11-30 18:22   ` Loic Poulain
2020-12-01  1:16     ` Hemant Kumar
2020-12-01 17:36       ` Loic Poulain
2020-12-01 17:37         ` Jeffrey Hugo [this message]
2020-12-01 17:52           ` Loic Poulain
2020-12-01 17:51             ` Jeffrey Hugo
2020-12-01 18:05               ` Loic Poulain
2020-12-01 18:04                 ` Jeffrey Hugo
2020-12-01 21:59                   ` Hemant Kumar
2020-12-01 19:29 ` [PATCH v13 0/4] userspace MHI " Jakub Kicinski
2020-12-01 19:40   ` Jeffrey Hugo
2020-12-01 20:03     ` Jakub Kicinski
2020-12-01 20:48       ` Jeffrey Hugo
2020-12-02  2:55         ` Jakub Kicinski
2020-12-02  4:59           ` Jeffrey Hugo
2020-12-06  8:33             ` Leon Romanovsky
2020-12-08 16:59               ` Manivannan Sadhasivam
2020-12-08 19:16                 ` Leon Romanovsky
2020-12-02  4:15       ` Manivannan Sadhasivam
2020-12-02  4:38   ` Bjorn Andersson

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=1247e32e-ed67-de6b-81ec-3bde9ad93250@codeaurora.org \
    --to=jhugo@codeaurora.org \
    --cc=bbhatt@codeaurora.org \
    --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=hemantk@codeaurora.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=loic.poulain@linaro.org \
    --cc=manivannan.sadhasivam@linaro.org \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.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: 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).