Hi,
I have started reviewing this set. Comments herein are related to code logic
only. I will comment on the overall approach at a later time.
On Fri, Oct 01, 2021 at 12:12:28PM +0200, Arnaud Pouliquen wrote:
> In preparation of the migration of the management of rvdev in
> rproc_virtio, this patch spins off new functions to manage the
Are you referring to file remoteproc_virtio.c? If so please clearly state that
it is the case by using the real name. Otherwise it is very confusing.
> remoteproc virtio device.
>
> The rproc_rvdev_add_device and rproc_rvdev_remove_device will be
> moved to remoteproc_virtio.
Here too I have to guess that you mean remoteproc_virtio.c. Moreover two
different nomenclatures are used in 3 lines.
>
> In addition the rproc_register_rvdev and rproc_unregister_rvdev is created
> as it will be exported (used in rproc_rvdev_add_device
> and rproc_rvdev_remove_device functions).
>
> Signed-off-by: Arnaud Pouliquen <arnaud.pouliquen@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c | 102 ++++++++++++++++++---------
> 1 file changed, 67 insertions(+), 35 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> index 502b6604b757..7c783ca291a7 100644
> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> @@ -484,6 +484,69 @@ static int copy_dma_range_map(struct device *to, struct device *from)
> return 0;
> }
>
> +static void rproc_register_rvdev(struct rproc_vdev *rvdev)
> +{
> + if (rvdev && rvdev->rproc)
> + list_add_tail(&rvdev->node, &rvdev->rproc->rvdevs);
> +}
> +
> +static void rproc_unregister_rvdev(struct rproc_vdev *rvdev)
> +{
> + if (rvdev)
> + list_del(&rvdev->node);
> +}
This file is a simple refactoring of the current code. Additions such as this
one should be done in a separate patch.
> +
> +static int rproc_rvdev_add_device(struct rproc_vdev *rvdev)
> +{
> + struct rproc *rproc = rvdev->rproc;
> + char name[16];
> + int ret;
> +
> + snprintf(name, sizeof(name), "vdev%dbuffer", rvdev->index);
> + rvdev->dev.parent = &rproc->dev;
> + ret = copy_dma_range_map(&rvdev->dev, rproc->dev.parent);
> + if (ret)
> + return ret;
Memory is allocated for @rvdev in rproc_handle_vdev() using kzalloc(). If
we return prematurely that memory will be leaked. Note that this problem is
present in the current code base. I suggest sending a separate patch to fix it
while this work is ongoing.
> +
> + rvdev->dev.release = rproc_rvdev_release;
> + dev_set_name(&rvdev->dev, "%s#%s", dev_name(rvdev->dev.parent), name);
> + dev_set_drvdata(&rvdev->dev, rvdev);
> +
> + ret = device_register(&rvdev->dev);
> + if (ret) {
> + put_device(&rvdev->dev);
> + return ret;
> + }
> + /* Make device dma capable by inheriting from parent's capabilities */
> + set_dma_ops(&rvdev->dev, get_dma_ops(rproc->dev.parent));
> +
> + ret = dma_coerce_mask_and_coherent(&rvdev->dev,
> + dma_get_mask(rproc->dev.parent));
> + if (ret) {
> + dev_warn(&rvdev->dev,
> + "Failed to set DMA mask %llx. Trying to continue... %x\n",
> + dma_get_mask(rproc->dev.parent), ret);
> + }
> +
> + rproc_register_rvdev(rvdev);
> +
> + rvdev->subdev.start = rproc_vdev_do_start;
> + rvdev->subdev.stop = rproc_vdev_do_stop;
> +
> + rproc_add_subdev(rproc, &rvdev->subdev);
Please see comment above.
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static void rproc_rvdev_remove_device(struct rproc_vdev *rvdev)
> +{
> + struct rproc *rproc = rvdev->rproc;
> +
> + rproc_remove_subdev(rproc, &rvdev->subdev);
> + rproc_unregister_rvdev(rvdev);
> + device_unregister(&rvdev->dev);
> +}
> +
> /**
> * rproc_handle_vdev() - handle a vdev fw resource
> * @rproc: the remote processor
> @@ -519,7 +582,6 @@ static int rproc_handle_vdev(struct rproc *rproc, void *ptr,
> struct device *dev = &rproc->dev;
> struct rproc_vdev *rvdev;
> int i, ret;
> - char name[16];
>
> /* make sure resource isn't truncated */
> if (struct_size(rsc, vring, rsc->num_of_vrings) + rsc->config_len >
> @@ -551,33 +613,13 @@ static int rproc_handle_vdev(struct rproc *rproc, void *ptr,
>
> rvdev->id = rsc->id;
> rvdev->rproc = rproc;
> - rvdev->index = rproc->nb_vdev++;
> + rvdev->index = rproc->nb_vdev;
This one may make sense in a later patch but for now it doesn't.
Depending on the time I have more comments to come later, tomorrow or on Monday.
Thanks,
Mathieu
>
> - /* Initialise vdev subdevice */
> - snprintf(name, sizeof(name), "vdev%dbuffer", rvdev->index);
> - rvdev->dev.parent = &rproc->dev;
> - ret = copy_dma_range_map(&rvdev->dev, rproc->dev.parent);
> + ret = rproc_rvdev_add_device(rvdev);
> if (ret)
> return ret;
> - rvdev->dev.release = rproc_rvdev_release;
> - dev_set_name(&rvdev->dev, "%s#%s", dev_name(rvdev->dev.parent), name);
> - dev_set_drvdata(&rvdev->dev, rvdev);
>
> - ret = device_register(&rvdev->dev);
> - if (ret) {
> - put_device(&rvdev->dev);
> - return ret;
> - }
> - /* Make device dma capable by inheriting from parent's capabilities */
> - set_dma_ops(&rvdev->dev, get_dma_ops(rproc->dev.parent));
> -
> - ret = dma_coerce_mask_and_coherent(&rvdev->dev,
> - dma_get_mask(rproc->dev.parent));
> - if (ret) {
> - dev_warn(dev,
> - "Failed to set DMA mask %llx. Trying to continue... %x\n",
> - dma_get_mask(rproc->dev.parent), ret);
> - }
> + rproc->nb_vdev++;
>
> /* parse the vrings */
> for (i = 0; i < rsc->num_of_vrings; i++) {
> @@ -596,13 +638,6 @@ static int rproc_handle_vdev(struct rproc *rproc, void *ptr,
> goto unwind_vring_allocations;
> }
>
> - list_add_tail(&rvdev->node, &rproc->rvdevs);
> -
> - rvdev->subdev.start = rproc_vdev_do_start;
> - rvdev->subdev.stop = rproc_vdev_do_stop;
> -
> - rproc_add_subdev(rproc, &rvdev->subdev);
> -
> return 0;
>
> unwind_vring_allocations:
> @@ -617,7 +652,6 @@ void rproc_vdev_release(struct kref *ref)
> {
> struct rproc_vdev *rvdev = container_of(ref, struct rproc_vdev, refcount);
> struct rproc_vring *rvring;
> - struct rproc *rproc = rvdev->rproc;
> int id;
>
> for (id = 0; id < ARRAY_SIZE(rvdev->vring); id++) {
> @@ -625,9 +659,7 @@ void rproc_vdev_release(struct kref *ref)
> rproc_free_vring(rvring);
> }
>
> - rproc_remove_subdev(rproc, &rvdev->subdev);
> - list_del(&rvdev->node);
> - device_unregister(&rvdev->dev);
> + rproc_rvdev_remove_device(rvdev);
> }
>
> /**
> --
> 2.17.1
>
