Re: [PATCH v3 1/4] remoteproc: introduce rproc_get_by_phandle API

[Ohad Ben-Cohen <ohad@wizery.com>]

Hi Suman,

On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 6:09 PM, Suman Anna <s-anna@ti.com> wrote:
> On 05/09/2015 02:39 AM, Ohad Ben-Cohen wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 10:37 PM, Dave Gerlach <d-gerlach@ti.com> wrote:
> >> This patch uses the code removed by commit 40e575b1d0b3 ("remoteproc:
> >> remove the get_by_name/put API") for the ref counting a rproc klist
> >> code but has rproc_get_by_name replaced with an rproc_get_by_phandle API.
> >
> > The general idea makes sense to me, but I'm not sure we really do need
> > a klist here, since the usage profile of this list is expected to be
> > super simple: very small number of accessors, looking for small number
> > of list members a small number of times, and probably never do need to
> > modify the list while accessing it.
> >
> > I suspect that the code would be simpler to maintain, debug and
> > understand if we just use a simple list with a simple locking
> > methodology here.
>
> The klist usage is something that we restored from previous remoteproc
> core code as used by the rproc_get_by_name() API. This was removed in
> commit 40e575b1d0b3 ("remoteproc: remove the get_by_name/put API"). We
> chose to use the code that had been present before rather than inventing
> something new all over again. If you feel that a regular list is the way
> to go forward, we can make the switch.

Yes, please. Using a regular list with a simple locking methodology
should make the code easier to understand and debug.

Thanks,
Ohad.