From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.6 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA176C43603 for ; Sat, 14 Dec 2019 22:28:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 95DA82067C for ; Sat, 14 Dec 2019 22:28:06 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=crapouillou.net header.i=@crapouillou.net header.b="k3Wr0qSC" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726803AbfLNW2G (ORCPT ); Sat, 14 Dec 2019 17:28:06 -0500 Received: from outils.crapouillou.net ([89.234.176.41]:40884 "EHLO crapouillou.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726687AbfLNW2F (ORCPT ); Sat, 14 Dec 2019 17:28:05 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=crapouillou.net; s=mail; t=1576362483; h=from:from:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=vkyNSdZg4kfbaq1R2dOR/fJNQfzwkysyQhkhXjiurGE=; b=k3Wr0qSCNDiVPoB699vi5kHG7olQz7GQXV8W7sMgHj8W9/Qh1ke2RxmAK9T/68K/pdKkWU XTjeLHsu4YENIsnve24tzceAbbKZbDjMgNP7bLENPaF5nwkU5a7kaRRkvmiQymDWyt5X0h BhX12+Y3hh4c5z13Q2w8ZvOl5I51cMo= Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2019 23:27:58 +0100 From: Paul Cercueil Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/5] remoteproc: Add device-managed variants of rproc_alloc/rproc_add To: Fabien DESSENNE Cc: Ohad Ben-Cohen , Bjorn Andersson , Rob Herring , Mark Rutland , od@zcrc.me, linux-remoteproc@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Message-Id: <1576362478.3.4@crapouillou.net> In-Reply-To: <6fff431f-dd3f-a67e-e40b-8cee4060c37a@st.com> References: <20191210164014.50739-1-paul@crapouillou.net> <20191210164014.50739-2-paul@crapouillou.net> <6fff431f-dd3f-a67e-e40b-8cee4060c37a@st.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: devicetree-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: devicetree@vger.kernel.org Hi Fabien, Le jeu., d=E9c. 12, 2019 at 09:43, Fabien DESSENNE=20 a =E9crit : > Hi Paul, >=20 >=20 > Good initiative! See me remarks below. >=20 >=20 > On 10/12/2019 5:40 PM, Paul Cercueil wrote: >> Add API functions devm_rproc_alloc() and devm_rproc_add(), which=20 >> behave >> like rproc_alloc() and rproc_add() respectively, but register their >> respective cleanup function to be called on driver detach. >>=20 >> Signed-off-by: Paul Cercueil >> --- >>=20 >> Notes: >> v3: New patch >> v4: No change >>=20 >> drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c | 67=20 >> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> include/linux/remoteproc.h | 5 +++ >> 2 files changed, 72 insertions(+) >>=20 >> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c=20 >> b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c >> index 307df98347ba..0a9fc7fdd1c3 100644 >> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c >> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c >=20 >=20 > Maybe these devm function shall be defined in a new=20 > remoteproc/devres.c > file. Although it seems to be a common usage I don't know if there is=20 > a > rule for that. It's not a rule, more like a good practice. I'll do that. >=20 >> @@ -1932,6 +1932,33 @@ int rproc_add(struct rproc *rproc) >> } >> EXPORT_SYMBOL(rproc_add); >>=20 >> +static void devm_rproc_remove(void *rproc) >> +{ >> + rproc_del(rproc); >> +} >> + >> +/** >> + * devm_rproc_add() - resource managed rproc_add() >> + * @dev: the underlying device >> + * @rproc: the remote processor handle to register >> + * >> + * This function performs like rproc_add() but the registered=20 >> rproc device will >> + * automatically be removed on driver detach. >> + * >> + * Returns 0 on success and an appropriate error code otherwise. >> + */ >> +int devm_rproc_add(struct device *dev, struct rproc *rproc) >> +{ >> + int err; >> + >> + err =3D rproc_add(rproc); >> + if (err) >> + return err; >> + >> + return devm_add_action_or_reset(dev, devm_rproc_remove, rproc); >> +} >> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(devm_rproc_add); >> + >> /** >> * rproc_type_release() - release a remote processor instance >> * @dev: the rproc's device >> @@ -2149,6 +2176,46 @@ int rproc_del(struct rproc *rproc) >> } >> EXPORT_SYMBOL(rproc_del); >>=20 >> +static void devm_rproc_free(struct device *dev, void *res) >> +{ >> + rproc_free(*(struct rproc **)res); >> +} >> + >> +/** >> + * devm_rproc_alloc() - resource managed rproc_alloc() >> + * @dev: the underlying device >> + * @name: name of this remote processor >> + * @ops: platform-specific handlers (mainly start/stop) >> + * @firmware: name of firmware file to load, can be NULL >> + * @len: length of private data needed by the rproc driver (in=20 >> bytes) >> + * >> + * This function performs like rproc_alloc() but the acuired rproc=20 >> device will >=20 >=20 > typo: s/acuired/acquired >=20 >=20 >> + * automatically be released on driver detach. >> + * >> + * On success the new rproc is returned, and on failure, NULL. >> + */ >> +struct rproc *devm_rproc_alloc(struct device *dev, const char=20 >> *name, >> + const struct rproc_ops *ops, >> + const char *firmware, int len) >> +{ >> + struct rproc **ptr, *rproc; >> + >> + ptr =3D devres_alloc(devm_rproc_free, sizeof(*ptr), GFP_KERNEL); >> + if (!ptr) >> + return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM); >> + >> + rproc =3D rproc_alloc(dev, name, ops, firmware, len); >> + if (rproc) { >> + *ptr =3D rproc; >> + devres_add(dev, ptr); >> + } else { >> + devres_free(ptr); >> + } >> + >> + return rproc; >=20 >=20 > Can't you use devm_add_action_or_reset() here too? Yes, I guess that will make things simpler. Thanks, -Paul >=20 >> +} >> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(devm_rproc_alloc); >> + >> /** >> * rproc_add_subdev() - add a subdevice to a remoteproc >> * @rproc: rproc handle to add the subdevice to >> diff --git a/include/linux/remoteproc.h b/include/linux/remoteproc.h >> index 16ad66683ad0..5f201f0c86c3 100644 >> --- a/include/linux/remoteproc.h >> +++ b/include/linux/remoteproc.h >> @@ -595,6 +595,11 @@ int rproc_add(struct rproc *rproc); >> int rproc_del(struct rproc *rproc); >> void rproc_free(struct rproc *rproc); >>=20 >> +struct rproc *devm_rproc_alloc(struct device *dev, const char=20 >> *name, >> + const struct rproc_ops *ops, >> + const char *firmware, int len); >> +int devm_rproc_add(struct device *dev, struct rproc *rproc); >> + >> void rproc_add_carveout(struct rproc *rproc, struct=20 >> rproc_mem_entry *mem); >>=20 >> struct rproc_mem_entry * >=20 >=20 > BR >=20 > Fabien =