Re: [PATCH 3/3] remoteproc: add .stop device parameter for stopping remote processor

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



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



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Embedded]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]

  Powered by Linux