On Mon, Jun 22, 2020 at 12:25:02AM -0700, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
> On Mon 01 Jun 10:51 PDT 2020, Mathieu Poirier wrote:
> 
> > Add a new function to assert the general health of the remote
> > processor before handing it to the remoteproc core.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Mathieu Poirier <[email protected]>
> > ---
> >  drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c | 45 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >  1 file changed, 45 insertions(+)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c 
> > b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> > index c70fa0372d07..0be8343dd851 100644
> > --- a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> > +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> > @@ -2060,6 +2060,47 @@ struct rproc *rproc_get_by_phandle(phandle phandle)
> >  #endif
> >  EXPORT_SYMBOL(rproc_get_by_phandle);
> >  
> > +static int rproc_validate(struct rproc *rproc)
> > +{
> > +   /*
> > +    * When adding a remote processor, the state of the device
> > +    * can be offline or detached, nothing else.
> > +    */
> > +   if (rproc->state != RPROC_OFFLINE &&
> > +       rproc->state != RPROC_DETACHED)
> > +           goto inval;
> 
> I would prefer that you just return -EINVAL; directly.
> 
> Overall I think this would be better represented as a switch on
> rproc->state though.
> 

Sure thing.

> 
> I think the logic is sound though.
> 
> Regards,
> Bjorn
> 
> > +
> > +   if (rproc->state == RPROC_OFFLINE) {
> > +           /*
> > +            * An offline processor without a start()
> > +            * function makes no sense.
> > +            */
> > +           if (!rproc->ops->start)
> > +                   goto inval;
> > +   }
> > +
> > +   if (rproc->state == RPROC_DETACHED) {
> > +           /*
> > +            * A remote processor in a detached state without an
> > +            * attach() function makes not sense.
> > +            */
> > +           if (!rproc->ops->attach)
> > +                   goto inval;
> > +           /*
> > +            * When attaching to a remote processor the device memory
> > +            * is already available and as such there is no need to have a
> > +            * cached table.
> > +            */
> > +           if (rproc->cached_table)
> > +                   goto inval;
> > +   }
> > +
> > +   return 0;
> > +
> > +inval:
> > +   return -EINVAL;
> > +}
> > +
> >  /**
> >   * rproc_add() - register a remote processor
> >   * @rproc: the remote processor handle to register
> > @@ -2089,6 +2130,10 @@ int rproc_add(struct rproc *rproc)
> >     if (ret < 0)
> >             return ret;
> >  
> > +   ret = rproc_validate(rproc);
> > +   if (ret < 0)
> > +           return ret;
> > +
> >     dev_info(dev, "%s is available\n", rproc->name);
> >  
> >     /* create debugfs entries */
> > -- 
> > 2.20.1
> > 

Reply via email to