[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ef14dc68-d2f8-0934-7be5-dfb3a4771f27@bmw-carit.de>
Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2016 08:57:09 +0200
From: Daniel Wagner <daniel.wagner@...-carit.de>
To: "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@...nel.org>
CC: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>,
Arend van Spriel <arend.vanspriel@...adcom.com>,
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>,
Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>,
<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 08/02/2016 09:41 AM, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 02, 2016 at 08:53:55AM +0200, Daniel Wagner wrote:
>> On 08/02/2016 08:34 AM, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
>>> On Tue, Aug 02, 2016 at 07:49:19AM +0200, Daniel Wagner wrote:
>> So you argue for the remoteproc use case with 100+ MB firmware that
>> if there is a way to load after pivot_root() (or other additional
>> firmware partition shows up) then there is no need at all for
>> usermode helper?
>
> No, I'm saying I'd like to hear valid uses cases for the usermode helper and so
> far I have only found using coccinelle grammar 2 explicit users, that's it. My
> patch series (not yet merge) then annotates these as valid as I've verified
> through their documentation they have some quirky requirement.
I got that question wrong. It should read something like 'for the
remoteproc 100+MB there is no need for the user help?'. I've gone
through your patches and they make perfectly sense too. Maybe I can
convince you to take a better version of my patch 3 into your queue. And
I help you converting the exiting drivers. Obviously if you like my help
at all.
> Other than these two drivers I'd like hear to valid requirements for it.
>
> The existential issue is a real issue but it does not look impossible to
> resolve. It may be a solution to bloat up the kernel with 100+ MB size just to
> stuff built-in firmware to avoid this issue, but it does not mean a solution
> is not possible.
>
> Remind me -- why can remoteproc not stuff the firmware in initramfs ?
I don't know. I was just bringing it up with the hope that Bjorn will
defend it. It seems my tactics didn't work out :)
> Anyway, here's a simple suggestion: fs/exec.c gets a sentinel file monitor
> support per enum kernel_read_file_id. For instance we'd have one for
> READING_FIRMWARE, one for READING_KEXEC_IMAGE, perhaps READING_POLICY, and this
> would in turn be used as the system configurable deterministic file for
> which to wait for to be present before enabling each enum kernel_read_file_id
> type read.
>
> Thoughts ?
Not sure if I get you here correctly. Is the 'system configurable
deterministic file' is a knob which controlled by user space? Or it this
something you define at compile time?
Hmm, so it would allow to decided to ask a userspace helper or load the
firmware directly (to be more precised the kernel_read_file_id type). If
yes, than it is what currently already have just integrated nicely into
the new sysdata API.
cheers,
daniel
Powered by blists - more mailing lists