From: "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@kernel.org>
To: Daniel Wagner <wagi@monom.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ming Lei <ming.lei@canonical.com>,
"Luis R . Rodriguez" <mcgrof@kernel.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
"rafael.j.wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>,
Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@intel.com>,
Takashi Iwai <tiwai@suse.com>,
Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@linaro.org>,
Arend van Spriel <arend.vanspriel@broadcom.com>,
Daniel Wagner <daniel.wagner@bmw-carit.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 4/5] firmware: drop bit ops in favor of simple state machine
Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2016 00:30:04 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160909223004.GS3296@wotan.suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1473423144-21734-5-git-send-email-wagi@monom.org>
On Fri, Sep 09, 2016 at 02:12:23PM +0200, Daniel Wagner wrote:
> From: Daniel Wagner <daniel.wagner@bmw-carit.de>
>
> We track the state of the loading with bit ops. Since the state machine
We track the state of the firmware usermode helper loading with bit ops.
> has only a couple of states and they are all mutual exclusive there are
> only a few simple state transition we can model this simplify.
>
> UNKNOWN -> LOADING -> DONE | ABORTED
If you also do the change suggested below you'd have to annotate that change in the
commit log as well.
>
> Cc: Ming Lei <ming.lei@canonical.com>
> Cc: Luis R. Rodriguez <mcgrof@kernel.org>
> Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
> Signed-off-by: Daniel Wagner <daniel.wagner@bmw-carit.de>
> ---
> drivers/base/firmware_class.c | 12 +++++-------
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/base/firmware_class.c b/drivers/base/firmware_class.c
> index 5e38c27..8f5838c 100644
> --- a/drivers/base/firmware_class.c
> +++ b/drivers/base/firmware_class.c
> @@ -109,7 +109,7 @@ enum {
>
> struct fw_umh {
> struct completion completion;
> - unsigned long status;
> + u8 status;
Sorry I know I suggested the u8 but below you end up still using unsigned long status.
Instead of fixing this please consider changing:
struct fw_umh {
struct completion completion;
- unsigned long status;
+ enum fw_umh_status status;
Then you can use the enum fw_umh_status status in function arguments, I've used this
trick in other codebases to ensure that the data type for the status passed then
matches the same one expected, *and* if you use a switch() statement the compiler
will complain and moan about missing values (unless a default switch statement
is present). For such simple state machines then this is better practice.
> };
>
> static void fw_umh_init(struct fw_umh *fw_umh)
> @@ -120,7 +120,7 @@ static void fw_umh_init(struct fw_umh *fw_umh)
>
> static int __fw_umh_check(struct fw_umh *fw_umh, unsigned long status)
> {
> - return test_bit(status, &fw_umh->status);
> + return fw_umh->status == status;
Why does this not use READ_ONCE(fw_umh->status) ?
Luis
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-09-09 22:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-09-09 12:12 [PATCH v5 0/5] firmware: encapsulate firmware loading status Daniel Wagner
2016-09-09 12:12 ` [PATCH v5 1/5] firmware: document user mode helper lock usage Daniel Wagner
2016-09-09 22:14 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2016-09-22 2:36 ` Ming Lei
2016-10-05 20:41 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
[not found] ` <ab544ba0-2128-055f-3190-6a1a24e879e1@bmw-carit.de>
2016-10-05 20:46 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
[not found] ` <2ec51622-f727-e884-1a09-a595a31f4b21@bmw-carit.de>
2016-10-10 18:40 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2016-09-09 12:12 ` [PATCH v5 2/5] firmware: encapsulate firmware loading status Daniel Wagner
2016-09-09 22:19 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2016-09-09 22:24 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2016-09-13 9:47 ` Daniel Wagner
2016-10-05 20:27 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2016-10-07 11:41 ` Daniel Wagner
2016-10-10 20:37 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2016-10-18 13:30 ` Daniel Wagner
2016-10-18 21:54 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2016-10-19 8:05 ` Daniel Wagner
2016-09-09 12:12 ` [PATCH v5 3/5] firmware: rename fw_load_from_user_helper() and _request_firmware_load() Daniel Wagner
2016-09-09 22:17 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2016-09-09 12:12 ` [PATCH v5 4/5] firmware: drop bit ops in favor of simple state machine Daniel Wagner
2016-09-09 22:30 ` Luis R. Rodriguez [this message]
2016-09-09 12:12 ` [PATCH v5 5/5] firmware: do not use fw_lock for fw_umh protection Daniel Wagner
2016-09-09 17:38 ` [PATCH v5 0/5] firmware: encapsulate firmware loading status Luis R. Rodriguez
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=20160909223004.GS3296@wotan.suse.de \
--to=mcgrof@kernel.org \
--cc=arend.vanspriel@broadcom.com \
--cc=bjorn.andersson@linaro.org \
--cc=daniel.vetter@intel.com \
--cc=daniel.wagner@bmw-carit.de \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ming.lei@canonical.com \
--cc=rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com \
--cc=tiwai@suse.com \
--cc=wagi@monom.org \
/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
Powered by JetHome