[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <37a3cd66-262e-ffbe-ea7a-a6d5b1ca1c8b@bmw-carit.de>
Date: Mon, 1 Aug 2016 14:26:04 +0200
From: Daniel Wagner <daniel.wagner@...-carit.de>
To: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>,
"Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@...nel.org>,
Arend van Spriel <arend.vanspriel@...adcom.com>
CC: Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>,
Daniel Wagner <wagi@...om.org>,
Bastien Nocera <hadess@...ess.net>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Johannes Berg <johannes.berg@...el.com>,
Kalle Valo <kvalo@...eaurora.org>,
Ohad Ben-Cohen <ohad@...ery.com>,
<linux-input@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC v0 7/8] Input: ims-pcu: use firmware_stat instead of
completion
On 07/31/2016 09:23 AM, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> On July 30, 2016 9:58:17 AM PDT, "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@...nel.org> wrote:
>> On Sat, Jul 30, 2016 at 02:42:41PM +0200, Arend van Spriel wrote:
>>> On 29-07-16 08:13, Daniel Wagner wrote:
>>>> On 07/28/2016 09:01 PM, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
>>>>> On Thu 28 Jul 11:33 PDT 2016, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
>>> + Luis (again) ;-)
That was not on purpose :) My attempt to keep the Cc list a bit shorter
was a failure.
>>>>>> Do not quite like it... I'd rather asynchronous request give out
>>>>>> firmware status pointer that could be used later on.
>>>
>>> Excellent. Why not get rid of the callback function as well and have
>>> fw_loading_wait() return result (0 = firmware available, < 0 = fail).
>>> Just to confirm, you are proposing a new API function next to
>>> request_firmware_nowait(), right?
>>
>> If proposing new firmware_class patches please bounce / Cc me, I've
>> recently asked for me to be added to MAINTAINERS so I get these
>> e-mails as I'm working on a new flexible API which would allow us
>> to extend the firmware API without having to care about the old
>> stupid usermode helper at all.
These patches here are a first attempt to clean up a bit of the code
around the completion API. As Dmitry correctly pointed out, it makes
more sense to go bit further and make the async loading a bit more
convenient for the drivers.
> I am not sure why we started calling usermode helper "stupid". We
> only had to implement direct kernel firmware loading because udev/stsremd
> folks had "interesting" ideas how events should be handled; but having
> userspace to feed us data is not stupid.
I was ignorant on all the nasty details around the firmware loading. If
I parse Luis' patches correctly they introduce an API which calls
kernel_read_file_from_path() asynchronously:
sysdata_file_request_async(..., &cookie)
*coookie = async_schedule_domain(request_sysdata_file_work_func(), ..)
request_sysdata_file_work_fun()
_sysdata_file_request()
fw_get_filesystem_firmware()
kernel_read_file_from_path()
sysdata_synchronize_request(&cookie);
Doesn't look like what your asking for.
> If we want to overhaul firmware loading support we need to figure
> out how to support case when a driver want to [asynchronously] request
> firmware/config/blob and the rest of the system is not ready. Even if we
> want kernel to do read/load the data we need userspace to tell kernel
> when firmware partition is available, until then the kernel should not
> fail the request.
I gather from Luis' blog post and comments that he is on the quest on
removing userspace support completely.
Maybe this attempt here could be a step before. Step 1 would be changing
request_firmware_nowait() to request_firmware_async so drivers don't
have to come up with their own sync primitives, e.g.
cookie = request_firmware_async()
fw_load_wait(cookie)
Step 2 could be something more towards sysdata approach.
cheers,
daniel
Powered by blists - more mailing lists