From: Loic PALLARDY <loic.pallardy@st.com>
To: Suman Anna <s-anna@ti.com>,
"bjorn.andersson@linaro.org" <bjorn.andersson@linaro.org>,
"ohad@wizery.com" <ohad@wizery.com>
Cc: "linux-remoteproc@vger.kernel.org"
<linux-remoteproc@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"Arnaud POULIQUEN" <arnaud.pouliquen@st.com>,
"benjamin.gaignard@linaro.org" <benjamin.gaignard@linaro.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v4 10/17] remoteproc: add helper function to check carveout device address
Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2018 15:24:03 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <8b16461d7d99487480253cde5cdcfd2c@SFHDAG7NODE2.st.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2844874b-9484-aeee-c614-411d0ff38d12@ti.com>
Hi Suman,
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Suman Anna <s-anna@ti.com>
> Sent: mercredi 24 octobre 2018 00:14
> To: Loic PALLARDY <loic.pallardy@st.com>; bjorn.andersson@linaro.org;
> ohad@wizery.com
> Cc: linux-remoteproc@vger.kernel.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org;
> Arnaud POULIQUEN <arnaud.pouliquen@st.com>;
> benjamin.gaignard@linaro.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 10/17] remoteproc: add helper function to check
> carveout device address
>
> Hi Loic,
>
> On 7/27/18 8:14 AM, Loic Pallardy wrote:
> > This patch introduces a function to verify that a specified carveout
> > is fitting request device address and associated length
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Loic Pallardy <loic.pallardy@st.com>
> > ---
> > drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c | 47
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > 1 file changed, 47 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> > index 1e0fe3e..5dd5edf 100644
> > --- a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> > +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> > @@ -259,6 +259,53 @@ struct rproc_mem_entry *
> > return mem;
> > }
> >
> > +/**
> > + * rproc_check_carveout_da() - Check specified carveout da configuration
> > + * @rproc: handle of a remote processor
> > + * @mem: pointer on carveout to check
> > + * @da: area device address
> > + * @len: associated area size
> > + *
> > + * This function is a helper function to verify requested device area
> (couple
> > + * da, len) is part of specified carevout.
>
> %s/carevout/carveout/
OK
>
> > + *
> > + * Return: 0 if carveout matchs request else -ENOMEM
>
> %s/matchs/matches/
OK
>
> > + */
> > +int rproc_check_carveout_da(struct rproc *rproc, struct
> rproc_mem_entry *mem,
>
> static int since this seems to be only a local function.
OK
>
> > + u32 da, u32 len)
> > +{
> > + struct device *dev = &rproc->dev;
> > + int delta = 0;
> > +
> > + /* Check requested resource length */
> > + if (len > mem->len) {
> > + dev_err(dev, "Registered carveout doesn't fit len
> request\n");
> > + return -ENOMEM;
>
> ENOMEM not typically used for these kind of errors, you were probably
> inclined to used this since it is dealing with memory.
-EINVAL will be better
>
> > + }
> > +
>
> Both the below codepaths are exercised only when da is not
> FW_RSC_ADDR_ANY, and you are returning 0 otherwise (which is the case of
> matches as per your description above). Is that what you really want -
> should it be an error
Yes when da is equal to FW_RSC_ADDR_ANY we should check the length too
>
> > + if (da != FW_RSC_ADDR_ANY && mem->da == FW_RSC_ADDR_ANY)
> {
> > + /* Update existing carveout da */
> > + mem->da = da;
>
> Where would you need to update this?
In that case, we have 2 carveouts with the same name.
One has some fixed requests. The other one has none.
The goal here is to align both on the one which has the strongest requirements.
I think length is missing.
Regards,
Loic
>
> regards
> Suman
>
> > + } else if (da != FW_RSC_ADDR_ANY && mem->da !=
> FW_RSC_ADDR_ANY) {
> > + delta = da - mem->da;
> > +
> > + /* Check requested resource belongs to registered carveout
> */
> > + if (delta < 0) {
> > + dev_err(dev,
> > + "Registered carveout doesn't fit da
> request\n");
> > + return -ENOMEM;
> > + }
> > +
> > + if (delta + len > mem->len) {
> > + dev_err(dev,
> > + "Registered carveout doesn't fit len
> request\n");
> > + return -ENOMEM;
> > + }
> > + }
> > +
> > + return 0;
>
>
> > +}
> > +
> > int rproc_alloc_vring(struct rproc_vdev *rvdev, int i)
> > {
> > struct rproc *rproc = rvdev->rproc;
> >
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-10-24 15:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 75+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-07-27 13:14 [PATCH v4 00/17] remoteproc: add fixed memory region support Loic Pallardy
2018-07-27 13:14 ` [PATCH v4 01/17] remoteproc: configure IOMMU only if device address requested Loic Pallardy
2018-10-23 17:25 ` Suman Anna
2018-10-23 19:40 ` Loic PALLARDY
2018-10-24 3:46 ` Suman Anna
2018-10-24 12:56 ` Loic PALLARDY
2018-10-26 0:46 ` Suman Anna
2018-07-27 13:14 ` [PATCH v4 02/17] remoteproc: add rproc_va_to_pa function Loic Pallardy
2018-10-23 16:50 ` Suman Anna
2018-10-23 19:51 ` Loic PALLARDY
2018-10-24 3:19 ` Suman Anna
2018-10-24 12:58 ` Loic PALLARDY
2018-10-25 22:50 ` Suman Anna
2018-07-27 13:14 ` [PATCH v4 03/17] remoteproc: add release ops in rproc_mem_entry struct Loic Pallardy
2018-10-23 16:53 ` Suman Anna
2018-10-23 20:48 ` Suman Anna
2018-07-27 13:14 ` [PATCH v4 04/17] remoteproc: add name " Loic Pallardy
2018-10-23 17:06 ` Suman Anna
2018-07-27 13:14 ` [PATCH v4 05/17] remoteproc: add helper function to allocate and init " Loic Pallardy
2018-10-23 19:24 ` Suman Anna
2018-07-27 13:14 ` [PATCH v4 06/17] remoteproc: introduce rproc_add_carveout function Loic Pallardy
2018-10-23 17:05 ` Suman Anna
2018-10-23 19:48 ` Loic PALLARDY
2018-07-27 13:14 ` [PATCH v4 07/17] remoteproc: introduce rproc_find_carveout_by_name function Loic Pallardy
2018-10-23 19:28 ` Suman Anna
2018-07-27 13:14 ` [PATCH v4 08/17] remoteproc: add alloc ops in rproc_mem_entry struct Loic Pallardy
2018-10-23 21:20 ` Suman Anna
2018-10-24 16:00 ` Loic PALLARDY
2018-10-25 22:37 ` Suman Anna
2018-07-27 13:14 ` [PATCH v4 09/17] remoteproc: add helper function to allocate rproc_mem_entry from reserved memory Loic Pallardy
2018-07-27 13:14 ` [PATCH v4 10/17] remoteproc: add helper function to check carveout device address Loic Pallardy
2018-10-23 22:14 ` Suman Anna
2018-10-24 15:24 ` Loic PALLARDY [this message]
2018-10-25 22:50 ` Suman Anna
2018-07-27 13:14 ` [PATCH v4 11/17] remoteproc: modify rproc_handle_carveout to support pre-registered region Loic Pallardy
2018-07-27 13:14 ` [PATCH v4 12/17] remoteproc: modify vring allocation to rely on centralized carveout allocator Loic Pallardy
2018-10-10 5:32 ` Bjorn Andersson
2018-10-10 18:58 ` Loic PALLARDY
2018-10-15 6:40 ` Bjorn Andersson
2018-10-23 23:24 ` Suman Anna
2018-10-24 0:14 ` Suman Anna
2018-10-24 15:14 ` Loic PALLARDY
2018-10-29 20:17 ` Suman Anna
2018-12-04 17:56 ` Wendy Liang
2018-12-04 18:04 ` Loic PALLARDY
2018-12-04 18:58 ` Wendy Liang
2018-12-04 19:57 ` Loic PALLARDY
2018-12-04 21:24 ` Wendy Liang
2018-07-27 13:14 ` [PATCH v4 13/17] remoteproc: create vdev subdevice with specific dma memory pool Loic Pallardy
2018-09-27 17:17 ` Wendy Liang
2018-09-27 19:22 ` Loic PALLARDY
2018-09-27 20:18 ` Wendy Liang
2018-10-24 1:22 ` Suman Anna
2018-10-24 1:48 ` Suman Anna
2018-10-24 12:42 ` Loic PALLARDY
2018-10-25 22:06 ` Suman Anna
2018-10-24 12:40 ` Loic PALLARDY
2018-10-25 20:16 ` Suman Anna
2018-10-10 5:58 ` Bjorn Andersson
2018-10-10 19:17 ` Loic PALLARDY
2018-10-24 1:27 ` Suman Anna
2018-07-27 13:14 ` [PATCH v4 14/17] remoteproc: keystone: declare reserved memory region for vdev device Loic Pallardy
2018-07-27 13:14 ` [PATCH v4 15/17] remoteproc: da8xx: " Loic Pallardy
2018-10-24 2:57 ` Suman Anna
2018-10-24 13:19 ` Loic PALLARDY
2018-10-25 22:11 ` Suman Anna
2018-07-27 13:14 ` [PATCH v4 16/17] remoteproc: st: add reserved memory support Loic Pallardy
2018-10-24 3:01 ` Suman Anna
2018-10-24 12:37 ` Loic PALLARDY
2018-07-27 13:14 ` [PATCH v4 17/17] rpmsg: virtio: allocate buffer from parent Loic Pallardy
2018-09-28 7:56 ` Anup Patel
2018-09-21 6:04 ` [PATCH v4 00/17] remoteproc: add fixed memory region support Anup Patel
2018-09-26 16:00 ` Loic PALLARDY
2018-09-28 7:54 ` Anup Patel
2018-10-23 16:42 ` Suman Anna
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=8b16461d7d99487480253cde5cdcfd2c@SFHDAG7NODE2.st.com \
--to=loic.pallardy@st.com \
--cc=arnaud.pouliquen@st.com \
--cc=benjamin.gaignard@linaro.org \
--cc=bjorn.andersson@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-remoteproc@vger.kernel.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).