Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1496034 > unrolled thread
| Started by | "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@kernel.org> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-10-05 22:30 +0200 |
| Last post | 2016-10-10 22:40 +0200 |
| Articles | 3 — 2 participants |
Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel
This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by
below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.
Re: [PATCH v5 2/5] firmware: encapsulate firmware loading status "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@kernel.org> - 2016-10-05 22:30 +0200
Re: [PATCH v5 2/5] firmware: encapsulate firmware loading status Daniel Wagner <daniel.wagner@bmw-carit.de> - 2016-10-07 13:50 +0200
Re: [PATCH v5 2/5] firmware: encapsulate firmware loading status "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@kernel.org> - 2016-10-10 22:40 +0200
| From | "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@kernel.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-05 22:30 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH v5 2/5] firmware: encapsulate firmware loading status |
| Message-ID | <sp0Zb-6MJ-17@gated-at.bofh.it> |
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
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Daniel Wagner <daniel.wagner@bmw-carit.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-07 13:50 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <spBP3-8f8-7@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1496034 |
Hi Luis,
On 10/05/2016 10:27 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 11:47:08AM +0200, Daniel Wagner wrote:
>> 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?
If you look at the current code (not these patches) you have dependency
via the firmware_buf for two concurrent _request_firmware() calls:
1nd request (waker context)
_request_firmware()
_request_firmware_prepare()
fw_lookup_and_allocate_buf() # no pendending request
# returns 0 -> load firmware
fw_get_fileystem_firmware()
fw_finish_direct_load()
complete_all()
2nd request (waiter context)
_request_firmware()
_request_firmware_prepare()
fw_lookup_allocate_buf() # finds previously allocated buf
# returns 1 -> wait for loading
sync_cached_firmware_buf()
wait_for_completion_interruptible_timeout()
>>> +#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?
See above.
>>> @@ -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?
I don't know, I was looking at the code in firmware_class.c not any
users. Why is that important?
>>> /* 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.
As I tried to explain above the buffering code is depending on completion.
cheers,
daniel
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@kernel.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-10 22:40 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <sqPwB-5N5-15@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1497131 |
On Fri, Oct 07, 2016 at 01:41:21PM +0200, Daniel Wagner wrote:
> Hi Luis,
>
> On 10/05/2016 10:27 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 11:47:08AM +0200, Daniel Wagner wrote:
> > > 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 completion 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?
>
> If you look at the current code (not these patches) you have dependency via
> the firmware_buf for two concurrent _request_firmware() calls:
>
>
> 1nd request (waker context)
>
> _request_firmware()
> _request_firmware_prepare()
> fw_lookup_and_allocate_buf() # no pendending request
> # returns 0 -> load firmware
"no pending request" is an invalid association with what fw_lookup_and_allocate_buf()
does, its also why I have asked for this to be renamed, it looks for the firmware
in the fw cache, if it finds it it returns 1. Otherwise it creates a new buf
entry and adds it to the fw cache, and returns 0.
>
> fw_get_fileystem_firmware()
> fw_finish_direct_load()
> complete_all()
>
>
> 2nd request (waiter context)
>
> _request_firmware()
> _request_firmware_prepare()
> fw_lookup_allocate_buf() # finds previously allocated buf
> # returns 1 -> wait for loading
> sync_cached_firmware_buf()
> wait_for_completion_interruptible_timeout()
No, that's wait_for_completion_interruptible() not
wait_for_completion_interruptible_timeout()
Also note that we only call sync_cached_firmware_buf()
*iff* fw_lookup_and_allocate_buf() returned the 1 -- I mentioned
when this happens above. That happens only if we already had the entry on
the fw cache. As it stands -- concurrent calls against the same fw name
could cause a clash here, as such, the wait_for_completion_interruptible()
is indeed still needed.
Further optimizations can be considered later but for indeed, agreed
that completion is needed even for the direct fw load case. The timeout
though, I don't see a reason for it.
> > > > +#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?
>
> See above.
Sure, but note how the timeout is not used.
> > > > @@ -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?
>
> I don't know, I was looking at the code in firmware_class.c not any users.
> Why is that important?
Sorry I meant struct firmware_priv is used by sysfs stuff only, the sysfs stuff
is only used for the FW UMH.
> > > > /* 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.
>
> As I tried to explain above the buffering code is depending on completion.
OK sure agreed. The timeout, no though, unless I missed something?
Luis
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel
csiph-web