On Tue 24 Jan 15:13 PST 2017, Sarangdhar Joshi wrote:
> The rproc_add_virtio_devices() requests firmware asynchronously and
> triggers boot if the auto_boot flag is set. However, this
> asynchronous call seems to be redundant for non auto-boot scenario
> since the rproc_boot() would call request_firmware() anyways. Move
> the auto_boot check to rproc_add() so that a redundant call to
> _request_firmware can be avoided for non auto-boot case.
>
> Signed-off-by: Sarangdhar Joshi <spjo...@codeaurora.org>
Looks good, applied both patches.
Regards,
Bjorn
> ---
>
> I'm requesting RFC on this patch since I'm not aware of any scenario
> where we might need asynchronous firmware loading for non auto-boot case.
>
> drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c | 14 ++++++++------
> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> index f58e634..16242b0 100644
> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> @@ -970,9 +970,7 @@ static void rproc_fw_config_virtio(const struct firmware
> *fw, void *context)
> {
> struct rproc *rproc = context;
>
> - /* if rproc is marked always-on, request it to boot */
> - if (rproc->auto_boot)
> - rproc_boot(rproc);
> + rproc_boot(rproc);
>
> release_firmware(fw);
> }
> @@ -1286,9 +1284,13 @@ int rproc_add(struct rproc *rproc)
>
> /* create debugfs entries */
> rproc_create_debug_dir(rproc);
> - ret = rproc_add_virtio_devices(rproc);
> - if (ret < 0)
> - return ret;
> +
> + /* if rproc is marked always-on, request it to boot */
> + if (rproc->auto_boot) {
> + ret = rproc_add_virtio_devices(rproc);
> + if (ret < 0)
> + return ret;
> + }
>
> /* expose to rproc_get_by_phandle users */
> mutex_lock(&rproc_list_mutex);
> --
> The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum,
> a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project
>
