[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAK=WgbZGYa-xWE_cxPA1aq50kK2NBdQfhQHX+sPyowky6Syekg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 16 May 2015 10:18:08 +0300
From: Ohad Ben-Cohen <ohad@...ery.com>
To: Suman Anna <s-anna@...com>
Cc: Dave Gerlach <d-gerlach@...com>,
linux-arm <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-omap@...r.kernel.org" <linux-omap@...r.kernel.org>,
"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
Kevin Hilman <khilman@...aro.org>,
Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/4] remoteproc: introduce rproc_get_by_phandle API
Hi Suman,
On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 6:09 PM, Suman Anna <s-anna@...com> wrote:
> On 05/09/2015 02:39 AM, Ohad Ben-Cohen wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 10:37 PM, Dave Gerlach <d-gerlach@...com> wrote:
> >> This patch uses the code removed by commit 40e575b1d0b3 ("remoteproc:
> >> remove the get_by_name/put API") for the ref counting a rproc klist
> >> code but has rproc_get_by_name replaced with an rproc_get_by_phandle API.
> >
> > The general idea makes sense to me, but I'm not sure we really do need
> > a klist here, since the usage profile of this list is expected to be
> > super simple: very small number of accessors, looking for small number
> > of list members a small number of times, and probably never do need to
> > modify the list while accessing it.
> >
> > I suspect that the code would be simpler to maintain, debug and
> > understand if we just use a simple list with a simple locking
> > methodology here.
>
> The klist usage is something that we restored from previous remoteproc
> core code as used by the rproc_get_by_name() API. This was removed in
> commit 40e575b1d0b3 ("remoteproc: remove the get_by_name/put API"). We
> chose to use the code that had been present before rather than inventing
> something new all over again. If you feel that a regular list is the way
> to go forward, we can make the switch.
Yes, please. Using a regular list with a simple locking methodology
should make the code easier to understand and debug.
Thanks,
Ohad.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists