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=-7.2 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham 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 D3CB3C65C20 for ; Mon, 8 Oct 2018 16:34:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 84A0C2089D for ; Mon, 8 Oct 2018 16:34:02 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ti.com header.i=@ti.com header.b="Zf1roaVN" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 84A0C2089D Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=ti.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726701AbeJHXqd (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Oct 2018 19:46:33 -0400 Received: from lelv0143.ext.ti.com ([198.47.23.248]:51614 "EHLO lelv0143.ext.ti.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726383AbeJHXqd (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Oct 2018 19:46:33 -0400 Received: from dlelxv90.itg.ti.com ([172.17.2.17]) by lelv0143.ext.ti.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id w98GXl70063650; Mon, 8 Oct 2018 11:33:47 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ti.com; s=ti-com-17Q1; t=1539016427; bh=QZb5zFeP2oUOk1KgdUCVFXMPEQEWPKwMv+6YIFzezF4=; h=Subject:To:CC:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To; b=Zf1roaVN5Yhpza+ArK3u6p6RSSrw6Do0hIhXzhCCVMXup7tvfEo7XcfeSg8pFiue9 4d1e5Dy0UAS+W88ShrE6GABUI7ul5lhIcomcWUAE9JQtHntfjdcMj5rpXMWnzGb6FG n34jI1vIBe+TUm/TFztIXmewydu3UYixIyM8Hvvo= Received: from DFLE100.ent.ti.com (dfle100.ent.ti.com [10.64.6.21]) by dlelxv90.itg.ti.com (8.14.3/8.13.8) with ESMTP id w98GXkZb008631; Mon, 8 Oct 2018 11:33:47 -0500 Received: from DFLE106.ent.ti.com (10.64.6.27) by DFLE100.ent.ti.com (10.64.6.21) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.1466.3; Mon, 8 Oct 2018 11:33:46 -0500 Received: from dlep32.itg.ti.com (157.170.170.100) by DFLE106.ent.ti.com (10.64.6.27) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_0, cipher=TLS_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA) id 15.1.1466.3 via Frontend Transport; Mon, 8 Oct 2018 11:33:46 -0500 Received: from [128.247.58.153] (ileax41-snat.itg.ti.com [10.172.224.153]) by dlep32.itg.ti.com (8.14.3/8.13.8) with ESMTP id w98GXknU001500; Mon, 8 Oct 2018 11:33:46 -0500 Subject: Re: [PATCH] samples/rpmsg: Introduce a module parameter for message count To: Bjorn Andersson CC: , , References: <20180911174643.26199-1-s-anna@ti.com> <20181006062231.GF12063@builder> From: Suman Anna Message-ID: Date: Mon, 8 Oct 2018 11:33:46 -0500 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.9.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20181006062231.GF12063@builder> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-EXCLAIMER-MD-CONFIG: e1e8a2fd-e40a-4ac6-ac9b-f7e9cc9ee180 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Bjorn, On 10/06/2018 01:22 AM, Bjorn Andersson wrote: > On Tue 11 Sep 10:46 PDT 2018, Suman Anna wrote: > >> The current rpmsg_client_sample uses a fixed number of messages to >> be sent to each instance. This is currently set at 100. Introduce >> an optional module parameter 'count' so that the number of messages >> to be exchanged can be made flexible. >> > > Rather than sending N messages as fast as possible to any sample channel > that comes up, how about making the sample create a debugfs entry that > we can write messages to from user space? This sample demonstrates a kernel-level rpmsg usage, and I would prefer to maintain the current simplicity, and not add in any userspace interaction. That perhaps can be done as a different sample. I use this sample to serve as the basic test for checking the rpmsg transport functionality with multiple remoteprocs and/or multiple instances per remoteproc at the same time. The count parameter helps me with both early Silicon development, as well as exercising increased message exchanges so that the vring buffers are cycled. > > That would make it possible to improve the handling of multiple > remoteprocs and would allow for a variation in message lengths etc. FWIW, this already support multiple instances from the same remoteproc or different remoteproc. regards Suman > > Regards, > Bjorn > >> Signed-off-by: Suman Anna >> --- >> samples/rpmsg/rpmsg_client_sample.c | 6 ++++-- >> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/samples/rpmsg/rpmsg_client_sample.c b/samples/rpmsg/rpmsg_client_sample.c >> index f161dfd3e70a..9b6b27ea504f 100644 >> --- a/samples/rpmsg/rpmsg_client_sample.c >> +++ b/samples/rpmsg/rpmsg_client_sample.c >> @@ -22,7 +22,9 @@ >> #include >> >> #define MSG "hello world!" >> -#define MSG_LIMIT 100 >> + >> +static int count = 100; >> +module_param(count, int, 0644); >> >> struct instance_data { >> int rx_count; >> @@ -41,7 +43,7 @@ static int rpmsg_sample_cb(struct rpmsg_device *rpdev, void *data, int len, >> data, len, true); >> >> /* samples should not live forever */ >> - if (idata->rx_count >= MSG_LIMIT) { >> + if (idata->rx_count >= count) { >> dev_info(&rpdev->dev, "goodbye!\n"); >> return 0; >> } >> -- >> 2.18.0 >>