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=-7.1 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=unavailable 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 51167C433DF for ; Tue, 23 Jun 2020 19:38:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F0DF2098B for ; Tue, 23 Jun 2020 19:38:36 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linaro.org header.i=@linaro.org header.b="x15EKl3F" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2387465AbgFWTie (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 Jun 2020 15:38:34 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:45826 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1733248AbgFWTid (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 Jun 2020 15:38:33 -0400 Received: from mail-pj1-x1043.google.com (mail-pj1-x1043.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::1043]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4CD94C061755 for ; Tue, 23 Jun 2020 12:38:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pj1-x1043.google.com with SMTP id i12so1911667pju.3 for ; Tue, 23 Jun 2020 12:38:33 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linaro.org; s=google; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=wLUdK2O+Oo0igXjG1Jlq/+/VUzxX/d3DK9ShPndvY8g=; b=x15EKl3F5E8SKPmuVouUwJC4Riv2JoQmDBUPRWtKf8Jr0OI8g2BtI0CnP+ac30/DqZ kjZrwvi6LPTZZN4xd7/CyibC0GGEmUMKOBJr55vWJAmvJRgNRBK13e6fxsqWGhPkaqo+ GxE0pI8rnfai2y18sx45ejhGEeIGJTng3MF0VIATw3F+CereOWE0BkdaiVQ6n+Ot2jpE ZvcvNe/J5XM/WZ/qD2+I6DNMf1/qkFw+z8hHzFAdDw07CqERzhsRRm3MSgP59y+L44Rw o06rVZ7/BvxjNnkBXkwNXiwtR+UsFSNDvvtkKcPrXt4veiJV+3PkFaSypFr3m7qOGzvi 0t+w== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=wLUdK2O+Oo0igXjG1Jlq/+/VUzxX/d3DK9ShPndvY8g=; b=NhhmpkdcQt+FUOtfM8TVdbEZA/0HIc+ZPuH3cuxSafHAbr3i9eKJ0nADdmQOqbZLEu lAEmbqap5jP3n7oD3iTpWEtosMt+NAij72bFZi6LcKkBhDu49E5ZOfFI4NtGtpwnbnEG AwqZv+5QloeeG2/7wt5GNXW38IV50uq5sbTwOedguZnzy5JMjavD/MhuinKsPnuV23gn uV8xH+Yq1MalXmES86ZkZXh2HozMVYVpa6OBna7ANqwkBgUJ85MLZJe3CIRK+jvSf0PS xQ1DKD9gWIY5LDH8DTgeMkdYMfE2u2cTZ+3zgWtQxCR1eZC3CKABUJqnlekeewP55B/D XIZQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533zOg8EudwbbgfA3RUs6B3wQeqcq9Hth4HJnweTUcS0X19ktEdF HSrl4Md5mMPpzUEzV+c3VvBLUQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwuj4j82sIFTCrbLbdcgs9pvm/7pHq7I60LicHHsHHDcyTcH4VpyR4UXwx5Lpk2bWYwjo6Hbg== X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:8204:: with SMTP id x4mr24719824pln.153.1592941112375; Tue, 23 Jun 2020 12:38:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from xps15 (S0106002369de4dac.cg.shawcable.net. [68.147.8.254]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id r77sm155749pfc.87.2020.06.23.12.38.31 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 23 Jun 2020 12:38:31 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2020 13:38:30 -0600 From: Mathieu Poirier To: Bjorn Andersson 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() Message-ID: <20200623193830.GB1908098@xps15> References: <20200601175139.22097-1-mathieu.poirier@linaro.org> <20200601175139.22097-6-mathieu.poirier@linaro.org> <20200622072502.GG149351@builder.lan> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200622072502.GG149351@builder.lan> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Jun 22, 2020 at 12:25:02AM -0700, Bjorn Andersson wrote: > 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 > > --- > > 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. > Sure thing. > > 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 > >