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=-2.3 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no 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 A6784C433E1 for ; Thu, 9 Jul 2020 16:23:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 85347207DA for ; Thu, 9 Jul 2020 16:23:16 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=st.com header.i=@st.com header.b="LnZQWvll" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728260AbgGIQXP (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Jul 2020 12:23:15 -0400 Received: from mx08-00178001.pphosted.com ([91.207.212.93]:15084 "EHLO mx07-00178001.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726729AbgGIQXO (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Jul 2020 12:23:14 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (m0046660.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx07-00178001.pphosted.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 069GISBs026751; Thu, 9 Jul 2020 18:23:12 +0200 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=st.com; h=subject : to : cc : references : from : message-id : date : mime-version : in-reply-to : content-type : content-transfer-encoding; s=STMicroelectronics; bh=d2jcEAbPdJZRxx/7VM0LT3kmywQuHL6czVlRFoMpPmw=; b=LnZQWvllaO+te3tA8RkO5kTtXQpBJIUgDAz0JeDi+1TTNRm/EDI9BhS/n/UF8Mk7Lvel BF1J3p2pSNSTPJLUip6DhIc6QpSvu/UNKkkffQ24uqZLDbG2xSRJjP0XbMaAxHzpnkCe LBUWYVLei/G/WIOTYaLhPt4ensMuIxJkzVSTQeDGO6Y4J19tlcnte+lR5dqDg/OzgVoo qABeW8Mj+ZH/vrAjHxcNj9GtXtYerPWQ4SEuEGBi4OrzDZo2Ob3OuK2Lw/gkXwjsR6Sj jHWbKa1dJKUX86ydq7rsvQS9o31tSkC7njsqPreEUaajyujMaTVBOYD2bgwJwVd/i/ld 4w== Received: from beta.dmz-eu.st.com (beta.dmz-eu.st.com [164.129.1.35]) by mx07-00178001.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 325k405vsj-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 09 Jul 2020 18:23:12 +0200 Received: from euls16034.sgp.st.com (euls16034.sgp.st.com [10.75.44.20]) by beta.dmz-eu.st.com (STMicroelectronics) with ESMTP id 0691710002A; Thu, 9 Jul 2020 18:23:12 +0200 (CEST) Received: from Webmail-eu.st.com (sfhdag3node1.st.com [10.75.127.7]) by euls16034.sgp.st.com (STMicroelectronics) with ESMTP id F1B2B2C38AB; Thu, 9 Jul 2020 18:23:11 +0200 (CEST) Received: from lmecxl0889.tpe.st.com (10.75.127.49) by SFHDAG3NODE1.st.com (10.75.127.7) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Thu, 9 Jul 2020 18:23:11 +0200 Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 0/9] remoteproc: Add support for attaching with rproc To: Mathieu Poirier , "ohad@wizery.com" , "bjorn.andersson@linaro.org" CC: "linux-remoteproc@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" References: <20200707210014.927691-1-mathieu.poirier@linaro.org> From: Arnaud POULIQUEN Message-ID: Date: Thu, 9 Jul 2020 18:23:10 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20200707210014.927691-1-mathieu.poirier@linaro.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [10.75.127.49] X-ClientProxiedBy: SFHDAG5NODE2.st.com (10.75.127.14) To SFHDAG3NODE1.st.com (10.75.127.7) X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.235,18.0.687 definitions=2020-07-09_08:2020-07-09,2020-07-09 signatures=0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Mathieu On 7/7/20 11:00 PM, Mathieu Poirier wrote: > This set provides functionality allowing the remoteproc core to attach to > a remote processor that was started by another entity. > > New in V5: > 1) Added Bjorn's reviewed-by. > 2) Removed PM runtime call from patch 04. > 3) Used a 'case' statement in patch 05. > > Patches that need to be reviewed: 4, 5 and 9. > > Applies cleanly on rproc-next (49cff1256879) I tested the series in different modes, no issue observed. Tested-by: Arnaud Pouliquen Thanks for your work! Arnaud > > Thanks, > Mathieu > > Mathieu Poirier (9): > remoteproc: Add new RPROC_DETACHED state > remoteproc: Add new attach() remoteproc operation > remoteproc: Introducing function rproc_attach() > remoteproc: Introducing function rproc_actuate() > remoteproc: Introducing function rproc_validate() > remoteproc: Refactor function rproc_boot() > remoteproc: Refactor function rproc_trigger_auto_boot() > remoteproc: Refactor function rproc_free_vring() > remoteproc: Properly handle firmware name when attaching > > drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c | 213 +++++++++++++++++++++-- > drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_internal.h | 8 + > drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_sysfs.c | 17 +- > include/linux/remoteproc.h | 9 +- > 4 files changed, 230 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-) >