On Wed, Jul 2, 2014 at 9:01 AM, Luis R. Rodriguez <mcg...@suse.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 01, 2014 at 11:22:07AM +0200, Takashi Iwai wrote:
>> At Tue, 1 Jul 2014 11:54:24 +0800,
>> Ming Lei wrote:
>> >
>> > On Tue, Jul 1, 2014 at 7:30 AM, Luis R. Rodriguez
>> > <mcg...@do-not-panic.com> wrote:
>> > > From: "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcg...@suse.com>
>> > >
>> > > Now that the udev firmware loader is optional request_firmware()
>> > > will not provide any information on the kernel ring buffer if
>> > > direct firmware loading failed and udev firmware loading is disabled.
>> > > If no information is needed request_firmware_direct() should be used
>> > > for optional firmware, at which point drivers can take on the onus
>> > > over informing of any failures, if udev firmware loading is disabled
>> > > though we should at the very least provide some sort of information
>> > > as when the udev loader was enabled by default back in the days.
>> > >
>> > > With this change with a simple firmware load test module [0]:
>> > >
>> > > Example output without FW_LOADER_USER_HELPER_FALLBACK
>> > >
>> > > platform fake-dev.0: Direct firmware load for fake.bin failed with error
>> > > -2
>> > >
>> > > Example without FW_LOADER_USER_HELPER_FALLBACK
>> > >
>> > > platform fake-dev.0: Direct firmware load for fake.bin failed with error
>> > > -2
>> > > platform fake-dev.0: Falling back to user helper
>> > >
>> > > Without this change without FW_LOADER_USER_HELPER_FALLBACK we get no
>> > > output
>> > > logged upon failure.
>> > >
>> > > [0] https://github.com/mcgrof/fake-firmware-test.git
>> > >
>> > > Cc: Tom Gundersen <t...@jklm.no>
>> > > Cc: Ming Lei <ming....@canonical.com>
>> > > Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gre...@linuxfoundation.org>
>> > > Cc: Abhay Salunke <abhay_salu...@dell.com>
>> > > Cc: Stefan Roese <s...@denx.de>
>> > > Cc: Arnd Bergmann <a...@arndb.de>
>> > > Cc: Kay Sievers <k...@vrfy.org>
>> > > Cc: Takashi Iwai <ti...@suse.de>
>> > > Signed-off-by: Luis R. Rodriguez <mcg...@suse.com>
>> > > ---
>> > >
>> > > drivers/base/firmware_class.c | 12 ++++++++----
>> > > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>> > >
>> > > diff --git a/drivers/base/firmware_class.c
>> > > b/drivers/base/firmware_class.c
>> > > index 46ea5f4..23274d8 100644
>> > > --- a/drivers/base/firmware_class.c
>> > > +++ b/drivers/base/firmware_class.c
>> > > @@ -101,8 +101,10 @@ static inline long firmware_loading_timeout(void)
>> > > #define FW_OPT_NOWAIT (1U << 1)
>> > > #ifdef CONFIG_FW_LOADER_USER_HELPER
>> > > #define FW_OPT_USERHELPER (1U << 2)
>> > > +#define FW_OPT_FAIL_WARN 0
>> > > #else
>> > > #define FW_OPT_USERHELPER 0
>> > > +#define FW_OPT_FAIL_WARN (1U << 3)
>> > > #endif
>> > > #ifdef CONFIG_FW_LOADER_USER_HELPER_FALLBACK
>> > > #define FW_OPT_FALLBACK FW_OPT_USERHELPER
>> > > @@ -1116,10 +1118,11 @@ _request_firmware(const struct firmware
>> > > **firmware_p, const char *name,
>> > >
>> > > ret = fw_get_filesystem_firmware(device, fw->priv);
>> > > if (ret) {
>> > > - if (opt_flags & FW_OPT_USERHELPER) {
>> > > + if (opt_flags & (FW_OPT_FAIL_WARN | FW_OPT_USERHELPER))
>> > > dev_warn(device,
>> > > - "Direct firmware load failed with error
>> > > %d\n",
>> > > - ret);
>> > > + "Direct firmware load for %s failed
>> > > with error %d\n",
>> > > + name, ret);
>> >
>> > Maybe the warning can be always printed out since
>> > (FW_OPT_FAIL_WARN | FW_OPT_USERHELPER) should be
>> > always true.
>>
>> Yes, it'd be simpler. Let's reduce lines! :)
>
> Actually we don't want to warn when request_firmware_direct() is used right?
> That's really what
Yes, that is for the CPU microcode update in which it is common to
fail in direct loading, and x86 guys hate the warning.
> I meant to upkeep while adding a warning when _direct() is not used. So how
> about
> this as an ammendment:
Yes, the idea is right, and it is good to make request_firmware_direct()
not depend on CONFIG_FW_LOADER_USER_HELPER, and with
one FW_OPT_DIRECT_ONLY flag together it should work.
>
> diff --git a/drivers/base/firmware_class.c b/drivers/base/firmware_class.c
> index 23274d8..4f6adf3 100644
> --- a/drivers/base/firmware_class.c
> +++ b/drivers/base/firmware_class.c
> @@ -1180,7 +1180,6 @@ request_firmware(const struct firmware **firmware_p,
> const char *name,
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL(request_firmware);
>
> -#ifdef CONFIG_FW_LOADER_USER_HELPER_FALLBACK
> /**
> * request_firmware: - load firmware directly without usermode helper
> * @firmware_p: pointer to firmware image
> @@ -1202,7 +1201,6 @@ int request_firmware_direct(const struct firmware
> **firmware_p,
> return ret;
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(request_firmware_direct);
> -#endif
>
> /**
> * release_firmware: - release the resource associated with a firmware image
> diff --git a/include/linux/firmware.h b/include/linux/firmware.h
> index 67e5b80..5c41c5e 100644
> --- a/include/linux/firmware.h
> +++ b/include/linux/firmware.h
> @@ -45,6 +45,8 @@ int request_firmware_nowait(
> struct module *module, bool uevent,
> const char *name, struct device *device, gfp_t gfp, void *context,
> void (*cont)(const struct firmware *fw, void *context));
> +int request_firmware_direct(const struct firmware **fw, const char *name,
> + struct device *device);
>
> void release_firmware(const struct firmware *fw);
> #else
> @@ -66,13 +68,12 @@ static inline void release_firmware(const struct firmware
> *fw)
> {
> }
>
> -#endif
> +static inline int request_firmware_direct(const struct firmware **fw,
> + const char *name,
> + struct device *device)
> +{
> + return -EINVAL;
> +}
You define two request_firmware_direct?
>
> -#ifdef CONFIG_FW_LOADER_USER_HELPER_FALLBACK
> -int request_firmware_direct(const struct firmware **fw, const char *name,
> - struct device *device);
> -#else
> -#define request_firmware_direct request_firmware
> #endif
> -
> #endif
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
