On Tue, Dec 06, 2022 at 09:28:23AM +0800, Aiqun(Maria) Yu wrote:
> On 12/3/2022 1:34 AM, Mathieu Poirier wrote:
> > On Fri, Dec 02, 2022 at 05:45:32PM +0800, Maria Yu wrote:
> > > Only the first detected crash needed to be handled, so change
> > > to ordered workqueue to avoid unnecessary multi active work at
> > > the same time. This will reduce the pm_relax unnecessary concurrency.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Maria Yu <quic_aiquny@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > > drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c | 4 ++--
> > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> > > index c2d0af048c69..4b973eea10bb 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> > > @@ -2728,8 +2728,8 @@ static void __exit rproc_exit_panic(void)
> > > static int __init remoteproc_init(void)
> > > {
> > > - rproc_recovery_wq = alloc_workqueue("rproc_recovery_wq",
> > > - WQ_UNBOUND | WQ_FREEZABLE, 0);
> > > + rproc_recovery_wq = alloc_ordered_workqueue("rproc_recovery_wq",
> > > + WQ_FREEZABLE, 0);
> >
> > There is an indentation issue with the second line and this patch doesn't
> > compile:
> >
> My Clang 14.0.7 didn't have such kind of compilation error.
> what's your CC version pls? Maybe I can have a try to reproduce.
I was either:
arm-linux-gnueabihf-gcc 9.4.0
or
aarch64-linux-gnu-gcc 9.4.0
I can't remember if I was compiling for 32 or 64 bit.
>
> Anyway, I will double confirm if there is any difference with current
> patchset with my compile tested patchset as well.
>
> > CC drivers/remoteproc/imx_dsp_rproc.o
> > AR drivers/hwspinlock/built-in.a
> > In file included from /home/mpoirier/work/remoteproc/kernel-review/include/linux/rhashtable-types.h:15,
> > from /home/mpoirier/work/remoteproc/kernel-review/include/linux/ipc.h:7,
> > from /home/mpoirier/work/remoteproc/kernel-review/include/uapi/linux/sem.h:5,
> > from /home/mpoirier/work/remoteproc/kernel-review/include/linux/sem.h:5,
> > from /home/mpoirier/work/remoteproc/kernel-review/include/linux/sched.h:15,
> > from /home/mpoirier/work/remoteproc/kernel-review/include/linux/delay.h:23,
> > from /home/mpoirier/work/remoteproc/kernel-review/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c:19:
> > /home/mpoirier/work/remoteproc/kernel-review/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c: In function ‘remoteproc_init’:
> > /home/mpoirier/work/remoteproc/kernel-review/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c:2738:46: warning: too many arguments for format [-Wformat-extra-args]
> > 2738 | rproc_recovery_wq = alloc_ordered_workqueue("rproc_recovery_wq",
> > | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > /home/mpoirier/work/remoteproc/kernel-review/include/linux/workqueue.h:419:18: note: in definition of macro ‘alloc_ordered_workqueue’
> > 419 | alloc_workqueue(fmt, WQ_UNBOUND | __WQ_ORDERED | \
> > | ^~~
> >
> > Last but not least, please use the get_maintainer.pl script to make sure the
> > right people are CC'ed on your patchsets.get_maintainer.pl will be re-run for next patchset uploading.
> Thank you for reminder!
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Mathieu
> >
> > > if (!rproc_recovery_wq) {
> > > pr_err("remoteproc: creation of rproc_recovery_wq failed\n");
> > > return -ENOMEM;
> > > --
> > > 2.17.1
> > >
>
>
> --
> Thx and BRs,
> Aiqun(Maria) Yu
