From: "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@kernel.org>
To: Daniel Wagner <daniel.wagner@bmw-carit.de>
Cc: "Luis R . Rodriguez" <mcgrof@kernel.org>,
Daniel Wagner <wagi@monom.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ming Lei <ming.lei@canonical.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
"Srivatsa S . Bhat" <srivatsa.bhat@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
"Rafael J . Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>,
Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@intel.com>,
Takashi Iwai <tiwai@suse.com>,
Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@linaro.org>,
Arend van Spriel <arend.vanspriel@broadcom.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/5] firmware: encapsulate firmware loading status
Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2016 22:27:50 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20161005202750.GF3296@wotan.suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3484559b-bc77-d056-0775-481233d51fc0@bmw-carit.de>
On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 11:47:08AM +0200, Daniel Wagner wrote:
> Hi Luis,
>
>
> On 09/09/2016 02:12 PM, Daniel Wagner wrote:
> >The firmware user helper code tracks the current state of the loading
> >process via unsigned long status and a complection in struct
> >firmware_buf. We only need this for the usermode helper as such we can
> >encapsulate all this data into its own data structure.
>
> I don't think we are able to move the completion code into a
> CONFIG_FW_LOADER_HELPER section. The direct loading path uses
> completion as well.
Where?
> >+#ifdef CONFIG_FW_LOADER_USER_HELPER
> >+
> >+enum {
> >+ FW_UMH_UNKNOWN,
> >+ FW_UMH_LOADING,
> >+ FW_UMH_DONE,
> >+ FW_UMH_ABORTED,
> >+};
>
> The direct loading path just uses two states, LOADING and DONE.
> ABORTED is not used.
>
> >+struct fw_umh {
> >+ struct completion completion;
> >+ unsigned long status;
> >+};
> >+
> >+static void fw_umh_init(struct fw_umh *fw_umh)
> >+{
> >+ init_completion(&fw_umh->completion);
> >+ fw_umh->status = FW_UMH_UNKNOWN;
> >+}
> >+
> >+static int __fw_umh_check(struct fw_umh *fw_umh, unsigned long status)
> >+{
> >+ return test_bit(status, &fw_umh->status);
> >+}
> >+
> >+static int fw_umh_wait_timeout(struct fw_umh *fw_umh, long timeout)
> >+{
> >+ int ret;
> >+
> >+ ret = wait_for_completion_interruptible_timeout(&fw_umh->completion,
> >+ timeout);
> >+ if (ret != 0 && test_bit(FW_UMH_ABORTED, &fw_umh->status))
> >+ return -ENOENT;
> >+
> >+ return ret;
> >+}
> >+
> >+static void __fw_umh_set(struct fw_umh *fw_umh,
> >+ unsigned long status)
> >+{
> >+ set_bit(status, &fw_umh->status);
> >+
> >+ if (status == FW_UMH_DONE || status == FW_UMH_ABORTED) {
> >+ clear_bit(FW_UMH_LOADING, &fw_umh->status);
> >+ complete_all(&fw_umh->completion);
> >+ }
> >+}
> >+
> >+#define fw_umh_start(fw_umh) \
> >+ __fw_umh_set(fw_umh, FW_UMH_LOADING)
> >+#define fw_umh_done(fw_umh) \
> >+ __fw_umh_set(fw_umh, FW_UMH_DONE)
> >+#define fw_umh_aborted(fw_umh) \
> >+ __fw_umh_set(fw_umh, FW_UMH_ABORTED)
> >+#define fw_umh_is_loading(fw_umh) \
> >+ __fw_umh_check(fw_umh, FW_UMH_LOADING)
> >+#define fw_umh_is_done(fw_umh) \
> >+ __fw_umh_check(fw_umh, FW_UMH_DONE)
> >+#define fw_umh_is_aborted(fw_umh) \
> >+ __fw_umh_check(fw_umh, FW_UMH_ABORTED)
> >+
> >+#else /* CONFIG_FW_LOADER_USER_HELPER */
> >+
> >+#define fw_umh_wait_timeout(fw_st, long) 0
> >+
> >+#define fw_umh_done(fw_st)
> >+#define fw_umh_is_done(fw_st) true
> >+#define fw_umh_is_aborted(fw_st) false
>
> We still need the implementation for fw_umh_wait_timeout() and
> fw_umh_start(), fw_umh_done() etc.
Why?
> fw_umh_is_aborted() is not
> needed.
>
>
> >@@ -309,8 +373,7 @@ static void fw_finish_direct_load(struct device *device,
> > struct firmware_buf *buf)
> > {
> > mutex_lock(&fw_lock);
> >- set_bit(FW_STATUS_DONE, &buf->status);
> >- complete_all(&buf->completion);
> >+ fw_umh_done(&buf->fw_umh);
> > mutex_unlock(&fw_lock);
> > }
>
> Here we signal that we have loaded the firmware
The struct firmware_buf is only used for the sysfs stuff no?
> > /* wait until the shared firmware_buf becomes ready (or error) */
> > static int sync_cached_firmware_buf(struct firmware_buf *buf)
> > {
> > int ret = 0;
> >
> > mutex_lock(&fw_lock);
> >- while (!test_bit(FW_STATUS_DONE, &buf->status)) {
> >- if (is_fw_load_aborted(buf)) {
> >+ while (!fw_umh_is_done(&buf->fw_umh)) {
> >+ if (fw_umh_is_aborted(&buf->fw_umh)) {
> > ret = -ENOENT;
> > break;
> > }
> > mutex_unlock(&fw_lock);
> >- ret = wait_for_completion_interruptible(&buf->completion);
> >+ ret = fw_umh_wait_timeout(&buf->fw_umh, 0);
> > mutex_lock(&fw_lock);
> > }
>
> and here we here we wait for it.
Likewise.
Luis
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-10-05 20:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-09-09 12:12 [PATCH v5 0/5] " 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 [this message]
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
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=20161005202750.GF3296@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=rjw@sisk.pl \
--cc=srivatsa.bhat@linux.vnet.ibm.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