On 5/4/2023 10:04 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
On 04/05/2023 17:21, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
+ ret = qcom_minidump_init_apss_subsystem(md);
+ if (ret) {
+ dev_err(&pdev->dev, "apss minidump initialization failed: %d\n", ret);
+ goto unlock;
+ }
+
+ __md = md;
No. This is a platform device, so it can have multiple instances.
It can have only one instance that is created from SMEM driver probe.
Anyone can instantiate more of them.... how did you solve it?
To clarify - sprinkling more of singletons makes everything tightly
coupled, difficult to debug and non-portable. You cannot have two
instances, you have to control concurrent initialization by yourself in
each of such singletons.
I understand sometimes they are unavoidable, for example when this does
not map to hardware property. However here you have the parent - smem -
which can return you valid instance. Thus you avoid entire problem of
file-scope variables.
I get your point, why one's should avoid file scope variables.
This is infrastructure driver and will not have multiple instances and
even if it happens could be avoided with with the help of global mutex
and protect below function which i am already doing at the moment and
fail the other probe if it is already initialized with proper logging..e.g
"already initialized..."
ret = qcom_minidump_init_apss_subsystem(md);
And this will be in-lined with
/* Pointer to the one and only smem handle */
static struct qcom_smem *__smem;
Let me know if you still disagree...and have some other way ?
-- Mukesh
Best regards,
Krzysztof
