Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 03 Jan 2020 18:17:43 +0530 | From | Sibi Sankar <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v3 3/3] soc: qcom: apr: Add avs/audio tracking functionality |
| |
On 2020-01-03 02:27, Bjorn Andersson wrote: > On Sun 29 Dec 21:00 PST 2019, Sibi Sankar wrote: >> diff --git a/drivers/soc/qcom/apr.c b/drivers/soc/qcom/apr.c > [..] >> -static void of_register_apr_devices(struct device *dev) >> +static void of_apr_add_pd_lookups(struct device *dev) >> { >> + const char *service_name, *service_path; >> struct apr *apr = dev_get_drvdata(dev); >> struct device_node *node; >> + int ret; >> + >> + for_each_child_of_node(dev->of_node, node) { >> + ret = of_property_read_string_index(node, "qcom,protection-domain", >> + 0, &service_name); >> + if (ret < 0) >> + continue; > > While this implies that the qcom,protection-domain property is > missing... > >> + >> + ret = of_property_read_string_index(node, "qcom,protection-domain", >> + 1, &service_path); >> + if (ret < 0) >> + continue; > > ...this would imply that it's there but the format is wrong. I think > you > should log this and propagate the error. > >> + >> + ret = pdr_add_lookup(&apr->pdr, service_name, service_path); >> + if (ret && ret != -EALREADY) >> + dev_err(dev, "pdr add lookup failed: %d\n", ret); > > So we have a DT that denotes that PDR is required, but we failed to > register a lookup (for some reason). That would imply that apr is not > going to work. I think you should propagate this and make apr_probe() > fail to make this obvious.
this was predominantly done to deal with a mix of apr devices where some of them are independent of PDs so making apr_probe fail is detrimental here. Also apr devices having improper format will not be registered or removed.
> >> + } >> +} >> + >> +static void of_register_apr_devices(struct device *dev, const char >> *svc_path) >> +{ >> + struct apr *apr = dev_get_drvdata(dev); >> + struct device_node *node; >> + const char *service_path; >> + int ret; >> >> for_each_child_of_node(dev->of_node, node) { >> struct apr_device_id id = { {0} }; > > I think you should add a comment here describing what's actually going > on. Something along the lines of: > > /* > * This function is called with svc_path NULL during apr_probe(), in > * which case we register any apr devices without a > * qcom,protection-domain specified. > * > * Then as the protection domains becomes available (if applicable) > this > * function is again called, but with svc_path representing the service > * becoming available. In this case we register any apr devices with a > * matching qcom,protection-domain. > */
Thanks for writing ^^ up will include it in my next re-spin.
> >> >> + ret = of_property_read_string_index(node, "qcom,protection-domain", >> + 1, &service_path); >> + if (svc_path) { >> + /* skip APR services that are PD independent */ >> + if (ret) >> + continue; >> + >> + /* skip APR services whose PD paths don't match */ >> + if (strcmp(service_path, svc_path)) >> + continue; >> + } else { >> + /* skip APR services whose PD lookups are registered */ >> + if (ret == 0) >> + continue; >> + } >> + > > Regards, > Bjorn
-- Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project.
| |