From: Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@linaro.org>
To: Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@linaro.org>
Cc: ohad@wizery.com, linux-remoteproc@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, loic.pallardy@st.com,
arnaud.pouliquen@st.com, s-anna@ti.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 5/9] remoteproc: Introducing function rproc_validate()
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2020 00:25:02 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200622072502.GG149351@builder.lan> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200601175139.22097-6-mathieu.poirier@linaro.org>
On Mon 01 Jun 10:51 PDT 2020, Mathieu Poirier wrote:
> Add a new function to assert the general health of the remote
> processor before handing it to the remoteproc core.
>
> Signed-off-by: Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@linaro.org>
> ---
> drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c | 45 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 45 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> index c70fa0372d07..0be8343dd851 100644
> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> @@ -2060,6 +2060,47 @@ struct rproc *rproc_get_by_phandle(phandle phandle)
> #endif
> EXPORT_SYMBOL(rproc_get_by_phandle);
>
> +static int rproc_validate(struct rproc *rproc)
> +{
> + /*
> + * When adding a remote processor, the state of the device
> + * can be offline or detached, nothing else.
> + */
> + if (rproc->state != RPROC_OFFLINE &&
> + rproc->state != RPROC_DETACHED)
> + goto inval;
I would prefer that you just return -EINVAL; directly.
Overall I think this would be better represented as a switch on
rproc->state though.
I think the logic is sound though.
Regards,
Bjorn
> +
> + if (rproc->state == RPROC_OFFLINE) {
> + /*
> + * An offline processor without a start()
> + * function makes no sense.
> + */
> + if (!rproc->ops->start)
> + goto inval;
> + }
> +
> + if (rproc->state == RPROC_DETACHED) {
> + /*
> + * A remote processor in a detached state without an
> + * attach() function makes not sense.
> + */
> + if (!rproc->ops->attach)
> + goto inval;
> + /*
> + * When attaching to a remote processor the device memory
> + * is already available and as such there is no need to have a
> + * cached table.
> + */
> + if (rproc->cached_table)
> + goto inval;
> + }
> +
> + return 0;
> +
> +inval:
> + return -EINVAL;
> +}
> +
> /**
> * rproc_add() - register a remote processor
> * @rproc: the remote processor handle to register
> @@ -2089,6 +2130,10 @@ int rproc_add(struct rproc *rproc)
> if (ret < 0)
> return ret;
>
> + ret = rproc_validate(rproc);
> + if (ret < 0)
> + return ret;
> +
> dev_info(dev, "%s is available\n", rproc->name);
>
> /* create debugfs entries */
> --
> 2.20.1
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-06-22 7:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-06-01 17:51 [PATCH v4 0/9] remoteproc: Add support for attaching with rproc Mathieu Poirier
2020-06-01 17:51 ` [PATCH v4 1/9] remoteproc: Add new RPROC_DETACHED state Mathieu Poirier
2020-06-22 6:25 ` Bjorn Andersson
2020-06-01 17:51 ` [PATCH v4 2/9] remoteproc: Add new attach() remoteproc operation Mathieu Poirier
2020-06-22 6:36 ` Bjorn Andersson
2020-06-01 17:51 ` [PATCH v4 3/9] remoteproc: Introducing function rproc_attach() Mathieu Poirier
2020-06-22 7:07 ` Bjorn Andersson
2020-06-22 7:18 ` Bjorn Andersson
2020-06-23 19:37 ` Mathieu Poirier
2020-06-01 17:51 ` [PATCH v4 4/9] remoteproc: Introducing function rproc_actuate() Mathieu Poirier
2020-06-22 7:18 ` Bjorn Andersson
2020-06-01 17:51 ` [PATCH v4 5/9] remoteproc: Introducing function rproc_validate() Mathieu Poirier
2020-06-22 7:25 ` Bjorn Andersson [this message]
2020-06-23 19:38 ` Mathieu Poirier
2020-06-01 17:51 ` [PATCH v4 6/9] remoteproc: Refactor function rproc_boot() Mathieu Poirier
2020-06-22 7:25 ` Bjorn Andersson
2020-06-01 17:51 ` [PATCH v4 7/9] remoteproc: Refactor function rproc_trigger_auto_boot() Mathieu Poirier
2020-06-22 7:25 ` Bjorn Andersson
2020-06-01 17:51 ` [PATCH v4 8/9] remoteproc: Refactor function rproc_free_vring() Mathieu Poirier
2020-06-22 7:27 ` Bjorn Andersson
2020-06-01 17:51 ` [PATCH v4 9/9] remoteproc: Properly handle firmware name when attaching Mathieu Poirier
2020-06-04 14:16 ` Arnaud POULIQUEN
2020-06-04 20:14 ` Mathieu Poirier
2020-06-22 7:33 ` Bjorn Andersson
2020-06-23 19:48 ` Mathieu Poirier
2020-06-23 20:09 ` Bjorn Andersson
2020-06-04 14:24 ` [PATCH v4 0/9] remoteproc: Add support for attaching with rproc Arnaud POULIQUEN
2020-06-04 20:27 ` Mathieu Poirier
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=20200622072502.GG149351@builder.lan \
--to=bjorn.andersson@linaro.org \
--cc=arnaud.pouliquen@st.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-remoteproc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=loic.pallardy@st.com \
--cc=mathieu.poirier@linaro.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