On 11/25/19 9:28 AM, Sascha Hauer wrote: > On Thu, Nov 21, 2019 at 09:40:05AM +0100, Ahmad Fatoum wrote: >> Both the STM32 and i.MX7 remote proc drivers populate the .stop member >> in the struct rproc, but it's not used anywhere. > > The .stop member in struct rproc is introduced in this patch. Indeed. I was referring to the stop member in the ops struct, which is a so-far unused function pointer. >> ret = rproc_start(rproc, &fw); >> + if (ret == 0) >> + rproc->stop = PARAM_TRISTATE_FALSE; > > Can we use positive logic here? "Status Stopped is false" is harder to > read than just "running" or "started". Naming it .stop emphasizes the fact that it's only meant to stop execution, not start it. See below. >> + return stop(rproc); >> +} > > I would assume that when I can stop the remote processor with this > parameter I should be able to start it here as well, no? Which firmware would the processor execute when started via parameter? I see no benefit in powering up the co-processor without specifying a firmware image. Thoughts? Ahmad -- Pengutronix e.K. | | Steuerwalder Str. 21 | https://www.pengutronix.de/ | 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 | Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 | _______________________________________________ barebox mailing list barebox@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox
