Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 22 Mar 2023 10:34:57 -0700 | Subject | Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] remoteproc: enhance rproc_put() for clusters | From | Tanmay Shah <> |
| |
On 3/22/23 9:05 AM, Mathieu Poirier wrote: > Hi Tanmay, > > On Tue, Mar 21, 2023 at 09:09:36PM -0700, Tanmay Shah wrote: >> This patch enhances rproc_put() to support remoteproc clusters >> with multiple child nodes as in rproc_get_by_phandle(). >> >> Signed-off-by: Tarak Reddy <tarak.reddy@amd.com> >> Signed-off-by: Tanmay Shah <tanmay.shah@amd.com> >> --- >> drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c | 13 +++++++++++++ >> 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c >> index a3e7c8798381..e7e451012615 100644 >> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c >> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c >> @@ -2560,6 +2560,19 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(rproc_free); >> void rproc_put(struct rproc *rproc) >> { >> module_put(rproc->dev.parent->driver->owner); > There is something wrong here - this should have been removed.
Thanks Mathieu. Sure this needs to be fixed.
This is result of manually picking up patch from my side.
I will try to find better automated way to pick-up patches not available on mailing list.
> >> + struct platform_device *cluster_pdev; >> + >> + if (rproc->dev.parent) { > This condition is not needed, please remove. Ack. > >> + if (rproc->dev.parent->driver) { >> + module_put(rproc->dev.parent->driver->owner); >> + } else { >> + cluster_pdev = of_find_device_by_node(rproc->dev.parent->of_node->parent); >> + if (cluster_pdev) { >> + module_put(cluster_pdev->dev.driver->owner); >> + put_device(&cluster_pdev->dev);
I am not sure if cluster_pdev->dev should be dropped here.
Should we drop it in platform driver after rproc_free() ?
>> + } >> + } >> + } > Some in-lined documentation, the way I did in patch 1/2 would be appreciated. > Otherwize I think the above enhancement make sense. Ack I will document in next revision. > > Thanks, > Mathieu > >> put_device(&rproc->dev);
Also, if we decide to drop cluster->dev here then,
should we drop reference of rproc->dev before cluster->dev ?
>> } >> EXPORT_SYMBOL(rproc_put); >> -- >> 2.25.1 >>
| |