lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Mar]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH V2 2/3] efi: Introduce efi_rts_workqueue and some infrastructure to invoke all efi_runtime_services()
On Thu, Mar 8, 2018 at 5:22 AM, Prakhya, Sai Praneeth
<sai.praneeth.prakhya@intel.com> wrote:
>> > +struct workqueue_struct *efi_rts_wq;
>> > +
>> > static bool disable_runtime;
>> > static int __init setup_noefi(char *arg) { @@ -329,6 +331,19 @@
>> > static int __init efisubsys_init(void)
>> > return 0;
>> >
>> > /*
>> > + * Since we process only one efi_runtime_service() at a time, an
>> > + * ordered workqueue (which creates only one execution context)
>> > + * should suffice all our needs.
>> > + */
>> > + efi_rts_wq = alloc_ordered_workqueue("efi_rts_workqueue", 0);
>>
>> efi_rts_wq or efi_rts_workqueue?
>>
>> > + if (!efi_rts_wq) {
>> > + pr_err("Failed to create efi_rts_workqueue, EFI runtime services "
>>
>> Same here.
>
> Sure! I will make it consistent with "efi_rts_wq". Just tried to be more verbose
> with names :)
>

It is not a big deal, but using the exact same name is better for the
purposes of grepping and things like that :-) By the way, check the
commit title/message, there are some others there too.

> [...]
>
>> > +#define efi_queue_work(_rts, _arg1, _arg2, _arg3, _arg4, _arg5) \
>> > +({ \
>> > + struct efi_runtime_work efi_rts_work; \
>> > + \
>> > + INIT_WORK_ONSTACK(&efi_rts_work.work, efi_call_rts); \
>> > + efi_rts_work.func = _rts; \
>> > + efi_rts_work.arg1 = _arg1; \
>> > + efi_rts_work.arg2 = _arg2; \
>> > + efi_rts_work.arg3 = _arg3; \
>> > + efi_rts_work.arg4 = _arg4; \
>> > + efi_rts_work.arg5 = _arg5; \
>> > + /* \
>> > + * queue_work() returns 0 if work was already on queue, \
>> > + * _ideally_ this should never happen. \
>> > + */ \
>> > + if (queue_work(efi_rts_wq, &efi_rts_work.work)) \
>> > + flush_work(&efi_rts_work.work); \
>> > + else \
>> > + BUG(); \
>>
>> Thanks for the change! One remark, I would just do:
>
> Sorry! but I am planning to remove BUG(). Looks like it could defeat the purpose
> of patch. Please see Boris comments on the other thread.

No problem. Let's see how it looks in v3 :-)

>
> [...]
>
>> > +/*
>> > + * efi_runtime_work: Details of EFI Runtime Service work
>> > + * @func: EFI Runtime Service function identifier
>> > + * @arg<1-5>: EFI Runtime Service function arguments
>> > + * @status: Status of executing EFI Runtime Service
>> > + */
>> > +struct efi_runtime_work {
>> > + u8 func;
>> > + void *arg1;
>> > + void *arg2;
>> > + void *arg3;
>> > + void *arg4;
>> > + void *arg5;
>> > + efi_status_t status;
>> > + struct work_struct work;
>> > +};
>>
>> Why is efi_runtime_work in the .h at all?
>>
>
> Thanks for the catch. I will move it to runtime-wrappers.c file and will make it
> static too. It isn't being used in any other place.
>
>> Please CC me for the next version! :-)
>
> Sure! Sorry for that. I should have done in V2.

Thanks!

Cheers,
Miguel

>
> Regards,
> Sai

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-03-08 10:13    [W:0.059 / U:1.092 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site