From: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@codeaurora.org>
To: Ohad Ben-Cohen <ohad@wizery.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-omap@vger.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] remoteproc: block premature rproc booting
Date: Thu, 24 May 2012 02:15:54 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4FBDFC4A.1060602@codeaurora.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1337687472-23009-1-git-send-email-ohad@wizery.com>
On 5/22/2012 4:51 AM, Ohad Ben-Cohen wrote:
> When an rproc instance is registered, remoteproc asynchronously
> loads its firmware in order to tell which vdevs it supports.
>
> Later on those vdevs are registered, and when probed, their drivers
> usually trigger powering on of the remote processor.
>
> OTOH, non-standard scenarios might involve early invocation of
> rproc_boot even before the asynchronous fw loading has completed.
>
> We're not sure we really want to support those scenarios, but right
> now we do (e.g. via rproc_get_by_name), so let's simply fix this race
> by blocking those premature rproc_boot() flows until the async fw
> loading is completed.
>
> Reported-and-tested-by: Sjur Brandeland <sjur.brandeland@stericsson.com>
> Signed-off-by: Ohad Ben-Cohen <ohad@wizery.com>
> ---
> drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c | 12 ++++++++++++
> 1 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> index 40e2b2d..464ea4f 100644
> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> @@ -1141,6 +1141,18 @@ int rproc_boot(struct rproc *rproc)
>
> dev = rproc->dev;
>
> + /*
> + * if asynchronoush fw loading is underway, wait up to 65 secs
> + * (just a bit more than the firmware request's timeout)
> + */
> + ret = wait_for_completion_interruptible_timeout(
> + &rproc->firmware_loading_complete,
> + msecs_to_jiffies(65000));
The request_firmware timeout is defaulted to 60 seconds but not
necessarily 60 if the user has changed the timeout in sysfs.
Why does this need to be a timeout at all? Presumably
request_firmware_nowait() in rproc_register() will timeout and complete
the firmware_loading_complete completion variable. Would it suffice to
have some new rproc->state like RPROC_UNKNOWN that we set in
rproc_register() before adding it to the list of rprocs? If we find the
firmware then we set it to RPROC_READY or RPROC_REGISTERED? Then we
wait_for_completion() and check the state, failing if it's still in the
unknown state.
--
Sent by an employee of the Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-05-24 9:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-05-22 11:51 [PATCH] remoteproc: block premature rproc booting Ohad Ben-Cohen
2012-05-24 9:15 ` Stephen Boyd [this message]
2012-05-24 20:11 ` Ohad Ben-Cohen
2012-06-04 21:23 ` Stephen Boyd
2012-06-05 10:57 ` Ohad Ben-Cohen
2012-06-06 3:25 ` Stephen Boyd
2012-06-06 5:44 ` Ohad Ben-Cohen
2012-07-02 12:25 ` Ohad Ben-Cohen
2012-07-02 15:15 ` Sjur BRENDELAND
2012-07-02 15:19 ` Ohad Ben-Cohen
[not found] <81C3A93C17462B4BBD7E272753C10579232F86B623@EXDCVYMBSTM005.EQ1STM.local>
2012-06-29 14:56 ` Ohad Ben-Cohen
2012-07-02 6:08 ` Preetham-rao K
2012-07-02 21:10 ` Guzman Lugo, Fernando
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=4FBDFC4A.1060602@codeaurora.org \
--to=sboyd@codeaurora.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-omap@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ohad@wizery.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