Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.kernel > #1575385 > unrolled thread

Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/2] remoteproc: Reduce asynchronous request_firmware to auto-boot only

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.

Contents

  Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/2] remoteproc: Reduce asynchronous  request_firmware to auto-boot only Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@linaro.org> - 2017-02-07 06:10 +0100
    Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/2] remoteproc: Reduce asynchronous request_firmware  to auto-boot only Sarangdhar Joshi <spjoshi@codeaurora.org> - 2017-02-07 20:10 +0100

#1575385 — Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/2] remoteproc: Reduce asynchronous request_firmware to auto-boot only

On Tue 24 Jan 15:13 PST 2017, Sarangdhar Joshi wrote:

> The rproc_add_virtio_devices() requests firmware asynchronously and
> triggers boot if the auto_boot flag is set. However, this
> asynchronous call seems to be redundant for non auto-boot scenario
> since the rproc_boot() would call request_firmware() anyways. Move
> the auto_boot check to rproc_add() so that a redundant call to
> _request_firmware can be avoided for non auto-boot case.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Sarangdhar Joshi <spjoshi@codeaurora.org>

Looks good, applied both patches.

Regards,
Bjorn

> ---
> 
> I'm requesting RFC on this patch since I'm not aware of any scenario
> where we might need asynchronous firmware loading for non auto-boot case.
> 
>  drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c | 14 ++++++++------
>  1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> index f58e634..16242b0 100644
> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> @@ -970,9 +970,7 @@ static void rproc_fw_config_virtio(const struct firmware *fw, void *context)
>  {
>  	struct rproc *rproc = context;
>  
> -	/* if rproc is marked always-on, request it to boot */
> -	if (rproc->auto_boot)
> -		rproc_boot(rproc);
> +	rproc_boot(rproc);
>  
>  	release_firmware(fw);
>  }
> @@ -1286,9 +1284,13 @@ int rproc_add(struct rproc *rproc)
>  
>  	/* create debugfs entries */
>  	rproc_create_debug_dir(rproc);
> -	ret = rproc_add_virtio_devices(rproc);
> -	if (ret < 0)
> -		return ret;
> +
> +	/* if rproc is marked always-on, request it to boot */
> +	if (rproc->auto_boot) {
> +		ret = rproc_add_virtio_devices(rproc);
> +		if (ret < 0)
> +			return ret;
> +	}
>  
>  	/* expose to rproc_get_by_phandle users */
>  	mutex_lock(&rproc_list_mutex);
> -- 
> The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum,
> a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project
> 

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#1575965 — Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/2] remoteproc: Reduce asynchronous request_firmware to auto-boot only

Hi Bjorn,

On 02/06/2017 01:08 PM, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
> On Tue 24 Jan 15:13 PST 2017, Sarangdhar Joshi wrote:
>
>> The rproc_add_virtio_devices() requests firmware asynchronously and
>> triggers boot if the auto_boot flag is set. However, this
>> asynchronous call seems to be redundant for non auto-boot scenario
>> since the rproc_boot() would call request_firmware() anyways. Move
>> the auto_boot check to rproc_add() so that a redundant call to
>> _request_firmware can be avoided for non auto-boot case.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Sarangdhar Joshi <spjoshi@codeaurora.org>
>
> Looks good, applied both patches.

Thanks for the review and applying these(and couple others) patches.

Regards,
Sarang
>
> Regards,
> Bjorn
>
>> ---
>>
>> I'm requesting RFC on this patch since I'm not aware of any scenario
>> where we might need asynchronous firmware loading for non auto-boot case.
>>
>>  drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c | 14 ++++++++------
>>  1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
>> index f58e634..16242b0 100644
>> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
>> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
>> @@ -970,9 +970,7 @@ static void rproc_fw_config_virtio(const struct firmware *fw, void *context)
>>  {
>>  	struct rproc *rproc = context;
>>
>> -	/* if rproc is marked always-on, request it to boot */
>> -	if (rproc->auto_boot)
>> -		rproc_boot(rproc);
>> +	rproc_boot(rproc);
>>
>>  	release_firmware(fw);
>>  }
>> @@ -1286,9 +1284,13 @@ int rproc_add(struct rproc *rproc)
>>
>>  	/* create debugfs entries */
>>  	rproc_create_debug_dir(rproc);
>> -	ret = rproc_add_virtio_devices(rproc);
>> -	if (ret < 0)
>> -		return ret;
>> +
>> +	/* if rproc is marked always-on, request it to boot */
>> +	if (rproc->auto_boot) {
>> +		ret = rproc_add_virtio_devices(rproc);
>> +		if (ret < 0)
>> +			return ret;
>> +	}
>>
>>  	/* expose to rproc_get_by_phandle users */
>>  	mutex_lock(&rproc_list_mutex);
>> --
>> The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum,
>> a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project
>>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-remoteproc" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>


-- 
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel

csiph-web