Re: [PATCH v2 08/19] remoteproc: core: Associate action to resource request

[Lee Jones]

On Wed, 31 Aug 2016, Loic Pallardy wrote:

> With new rproc_request_resource API, rproc driver has now the
> capability to provide resources to remoteproc in order to modify
> firmware resource table.
> But in some cases, other operations are needed like compatibility
> check between resources defined at firmware level and those handled
> by rproc driver, or remoteproc local resource management when firmware
> has no resource table.
> 
> This patch associates action to each resource request to:
> - verify a resource
> - update/amend a resource in firmware resource table
> - handle locally a resource
> 
> Signed-off-by: Loic Pallardy <loic.pallardy@xxxxxx>
> ---
>  drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c | 13 ++++++++++++-
>  include/linux/remoteproc.h           | 26 +++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>  2 files changed, 37 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> index 3282a4e..cd64fae 100644
> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> @@ -876,16 +876,20 @@ static void rproc_dump_resource_table(struct rproc *rproc,
>  	}
>  }
>  
> -int rproc_request_resource(struct rproc *rproc, u32 type, void *resource)
> +int rproc_request_resource(struct rproc *rproc, u32 type, u32 action, void *resource)
>  {
>  	struct device *dev = &rproc->dev;
>  	struct rproc_request_resource *request;
> +	struct fw_rsc_vdev *v;
>  	int size;
>
>  	request = devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof(*request), GFP_KERNEL);
>  	if (!request)
>  		return -ENOMEM;
>  
> +	if (action > RSC_ACT_LAST)

">=".  *_LAST is not a valid request.

> +		return -EINVAL;

The switch() statement below should ha

>  	switch (type) {
>  	case RSC_CARVEOUT:
>  		size = sizeof(struct fw_rsc_carveout);
> @@ -896,6 +900,12 @@ int rproc_request_resource(struct rproc *rproc, u32 type, void *resource)
>  	case RSC_TRACE:
>  		size = sizeof(struct fw_rsc_trace);
>  		break;
> +	case RSC_VDEV:
> +		v = resource;
> +		size = sizeof(struct fw_rsc_vdev);
> +		size += v->num_of_vrings * sizeof(struct fw_rsc_vdev_vring);
> +		size += v->config_len;
> +		break;
>  	default:
>  		dev_err(dev, "Unsupported resource type: %d\n", type);
>  		return -EINVAL;
> @@ -908,6 +918,7 @@ int rproc_request_resource(struct rproc *rproc, u32 type, void *resource)
>  	memcpy(request->resource, resource, size);
>  	request->type = type;
>  	request->size = size;
> +	request->action = action;
>  
>  	list_add_tail(&request->node, &rproc->override_resources);
>  
> diff --git a/include/linux/remoteproc.h b/include/linux/remoteproc.h
> index 4e2f822..2b0f1d7 100644
> --- a/include/linux/remoteproc.h
> +++ b/include/linux/remoteproc.h
> @@ -335,11 +335,34 @@ struct rproc_mem_entry {
>  };
>  
>  /**
> + * enum rproc_request_action - types of actions associated to a resource
> + * request
> + *
> + * @RSC_ACT_CHECK:	  request to verify this resource with firmware one
> + * @RSC_ACT_UPDATE:	  request to update firmware resource table with associated
> + *			  resource if possible
> + * @RSC_ACT_FORCE_UPDATE: force firmware resource table update with associated
> + *		          resource
> + * @RSC_ACT_LOCAL:        request to handle this resource localy but not to update
> + *			  firmware resource table
> + * @RSC_ACT_LAST:         just keep this one at the end
> + */
> +enum rproc_request_action {
> +	RSC_ACT_VERIFY		= 0,
> +	RSC_ACT_UPDATE		= 1,
> +	RSC_ACT_FORCE_UPDATE	= 2,
> +	RSC_ACT_LOCAL		= 3,

For reviewing purposes I suggest adding these entries as you start to
support them.  Then we have the code and the suggested comment in one
patch for easy comparison.

> +	RSC_ACT_LAST		= 4,
> +};
> +
> +/**
>   * struct rproc_requested_resources - add a resource to the resource table
>   *
>   * @resource:	pointer to a 'struct fw_rsc_*' resource
>   * @type:	'fw_resource_type' resource type
>   * @size:	size of resource
> + * @action:	action associated the resource
>   * @node:	list node
>   *
>   * Resources can be added by platform-specific rproc drivers calling
> @@ -350,6 +373,7 @@ struct rproc_request_resource {
>  	void *resource;
>  	u32 type;
>  	u32 size;
> +	u32 action;
>  	struct list_head node;
>  };
>  
> @@ -517,7 +541,7 @@ struct rproc_vdev {
>  	u32 rsc_offset;
>  };
>  
> -int rproc_request_resource(struct rproc *rproc, u32 type, void *res);
> +int rproc_request_resource(struct rproc *rproc, u32 type, u32 action, void *res);
>  struct rproc *rproc_get_by_phandle(phandle phandle);
>  struct rproc *rproc_alloc(struct device *dev, const char *name,
>  			  const struct rproc_ops *ops,

-- 
Lee Jones
Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead
Linaro.org â Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog