Re: [PATCH] ath3k: reduce memory usage

[Alexander Holler <holler@ahsoftware.de>]

Hello,

because the merge window is currently open, should I resend that patch 
or post it on another mailing list too?

I still think that driver should not waste about 250kb of memory. ;)

Regards,

Alexander

Am 30.11.2010 02:52, schrieb Gustavo F. Padovan:
> Hi Alexander,
>
> * Alexander Holler<holler@ahsoftware.de>  [2010-11-22 21:09:01 +0100]:
>
>> There is no need to hold the firmware in memory.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Alexander Holler<holler@ahsoftware.de>
>> ---
>>   drivers/bluetooth/ath3k.c |   75 ++++++++++++---------------------------------
>>   1 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 55 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/bluetooth/ath3k.c b/drivers/bluetooth/ath3k.c
>> index 128cae4..81cd1ed 100644
>> --- a/drivers/bluetooth/ath3k.c
>> +++ b/drivers/bluetooth/ath3k.c
>> @@ -43,46 +43,40 @@ MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(usb, ath3k_table);
>>   #define USB_REQ_DFU_DNLOAD	1
>>   #define BULK_SIZE		4096
>>
>> -struct ath3k_data {
>> -	struct usb_device *udev;
>> -	u8 *fw_data;
>> -	u32 fw_size;
>> -	u32 fw_sent;
>> -};
>> -
>> -static int ath3k_load_firmware(struct ath3k_data *data,
>> -				unsigned char *firmware,
>> -				int count)
>> +static int ath3k_load_firmware(struct usb_device *udev,
>> +				const struct firmware *firmware)
>>   {
>>   	u8 *send_buf;
>>   	int err, pipe, len, size, sent = 0;
>> +	int count = firmware->size;
>>
>> -	BT_DBG("ath3k %p udev %p", data, data->udev);
>> +	BT_DBG("udev %p", udev);
>>
>> -	pipe = usb_sndctrlpipe(data->udev, 0);
>> +	pipe = usb_sndctrlpipe(udev, 0);
>>
>> -	if ((usb_control_msg(data->udev, pipe,
>> +	send_buf = kmalloc(BULK_SIZE, GFP_ATOMIC);
>> +	if (!send_buf) {
>> +		BT_ERR("Can't allocate memory chunk for firmware");
>> +		return -ENOMEM;
>> +	}
>> +
>> +	memcpy(send_buf, firmware->data, 20);
>> +	if ((err = usb_control_msg(udev, pipe,
>>   				USB_REQ_DFU_DNLOAD,
>>   				USB_TYPE_VENDOR, 0, 0,
>> -				firmware, 20, USB_CTRL_SET_TIMEOUT))<  0) {
>> +				send_buf, 20, USB_CTRL_SET_TIMEOUT))<  0) {
>>   		BT_ERR("Can't change to loading configuration err");
>> -		return -EBUSY;
>> +		goto error;
>>   	}
>>   	sent += 20;
>>   	count -= 20;
>
> Patch looks good to me,  but I have a question here: what's 20 here? I
> didn't figured out.
>
> Vikram, what's your opinion on this patch? Can you ack/nack it?
>