[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Fri, 9 Sep 2016 13:43:45 +0200
From: Daniel Wagner <daniel.wagner@...-carit.de>
To: Ming Lei <ming.lei@...onical.com>, Daniel Wagner <wagi@...om.org>
CC: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"Luis R . Rodriguez" <mcgrof@...nel.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/4] firmware: encapsulate firmware loading status
On 09/08/2016 05:49 PM, Ming Lei wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 8:26 PM, Daniel Wagner <wagi@...om.org> wrote:
>>
>> if (ret != 0 && test_bit(...))
>> return -ENOENT;
>
> Another question, why do you want to return -ENOENT when
> userspace aborts the load? And looks it will always be override as
> -EAGAIN.
I took the -ENOENT from sync_cached_firmware_buf():
/* wait until the shared firmware_buf becomes ready (or error) */
static int sync_cached_firmware_buf(struct firmware_buf *buf)
{
int ret = 0;
mutex_lock(&fw_lock);
- while (!test_bit(FW_STATUS_DONE, &buf->status)) {
- if (is_fw_load_aborted(buf)) {
+ while (!fw_status_is_done(&buf->fw_st)) {
+ if (fw_status_is_aborted(&buf->fw_st)) {
ret = -ENOENT;
break;
}
mutex_unlock(&fw_lock);
- ret = wait_for_completion_interruptible(&buf->completion);
+ ret = fw_status_wait_timeout(&buf->fw_st, 0);
mutex_lock(&fw_lock);
There is a path where it not overwritten by -EAGAIN:
request_firmware()
_request_firmware()
_request_firmware_prepare
sync_cached_firmware_buf()
fw_status_wait_timeout()
return -ENOENT
If you want me to change it to EAGAIN, I'll do it. I just tried hard not
to have any changes in behavior.
cheer,
daniel
Powered by blists - more mailing lists