On 04/25/2018 08:49 AM, Arnaud Pouliquen wrote: > Hello Alex, > > I have already proposed it few weeks ago. > > https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/4/10/192 > > could you ack it, if you test it on your side? I am unable to test it. I found the bug by inspection (perhaps as you did). However I'll give you: Acked-by: Alex Elder <elder@xxxxxxxxxx> or Reviewed-by: Alex Elder <elder@xxxxxxxxxx> -Alex > Thanks, > Arnaud > > On 04/25/2018 03:36 PM, Alex Elder wrote: >> The last commit to "remoteproc_core.c": >> 880f5b388252 remoteproc: eAPass type of shutdown to subdev remove >> added a Boolean flag to the subdevice remove method, to distinguish >> between graceful shutdown and a crash. Unfortunately, the names of >> the parameters were inconsistent, and in fact have opposite meanings. >> >> In most cases, the parameter is named "crashed", but rproc_add_subdev() >> names the parameter "graceful" in the prototype for the remove method. >> >> The remove method is ultimately called (and supplied with the Boolean >> flag value) by rproc_remove_subdevices(). That is only called by >> rproc_stop(), and in the two spots where that is used, "graceful" is >> the right name for the flag: >> rproc_shutdown() passes true, indicating a graceful shutdown >> rproc_trigger_recovery() passes false, indicating a crash >> >> The fix is to make the parameter name consistent, and making the >> name and sense of the parameter to always be "crashed" produces the >> smallest change. So that's what this patch does. >> >> To verify this change, rproc_add_subdev() is called in five spots: >> - qcom_add_glink_subdev() passes glink_subdev_remove() >> - qcom_add_smd_subdev() passes smd_subdev_remove() >> - qcom_add_ssr_subdev() passes ssr_notify_stop() >> - qcom_add_sysmon_subdev() passes sysmon_stop() >> - rproc_handle_vdev() passes rproc_vdev_do_remove() >> >> Of these, only sysmon_stop() uses its "crashed" parameter. And it >> clearly assumes that "crashed" is the intended meaning: >> >> /* Don't request graceful shutdown if we've crashed */ >> if (crashed) >> return; >> >> So this function (added after the "crashed" parameter was added) >> exhibited buggy behavior, which is now fixed by this patch. >> >> Signed-off-by: Alex Elder <elder@xxxxxxxxxx> >> --- >> drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c | 4 ++-- >> include/linux/remoteproc.h | 2 +- >> 2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c >> index 6d9c5832ce47..a9609d971f7f 100644 >> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c >> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c >> @@ -1163,7 +1163,7 @@ int rproc_trigger_recovery(struct rproc *rproc) >> if (ret) >> return ret; >> >> - ret = rproc_stop(rproc, false); >> + ret = rproc_stop(rproc, true); >> if (ret) >> goto unlock_mutex; >> >> @@ -1316,7 +1316,7 @@ void rproc_shutdown(struct rproc *rproc) >> if (!atomic_dec_and_test(&rproc->power)) >> goto out; >> >> - ret = rproc_stop(rproc, true); >> + ret = rproc_stop(rproc, false); >> if (ret) { >> atomic_inc(&rproc->power); >> goto out; >> diff --git a/include/linux/remoteproc.h b/include/linux/remoteproc.h >> index d09a9c7af109..dfdaede9139e 100644 >> --- a/include/linux/remoteproc.h >> +++ b/include/linux/remoteproc.h >> @@ -569,7 +569,7 @@ static inline struct rproc *vdev_to_rproc(struct virtio_device *vdev) >> void rproc_add_subdev(struct rproc *rproc, >> struct rproc_subdev *subdev, >> int (*probe)(struct rproc_subdev *subdev), >> - void (*remove)(struct rproc_subdev *subdev, bool graceful)); >> + void (*remove)(struct rproc_subdev *subdev, bool crashed)); >> >> void rproc_remove_subdev(struct rproc *rproc, struct rproc_subdev *subdev); >> >> -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-remoteproc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
