Message-ID: <cb31dfb50079a1377cf27807a7b2eb3e@codeaurora.org>
Date:   Tue, 23 Jun 2020 18:41:37 -0700
From:   rishabhb@...eaurora.org
To:     Alex Elder <elder@...e.org>
Cc:     linux-remoteproc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        bjorn.andersson@...aro.org, tsoni@...eaurora.org,
        psodagud@...eaurora.org, sidgup@...eaurora.org,
        linux-remoteproc-owner@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 1/2] remoteproc: qcom: Add per subsystem SSR
 notification

On 2020-06-23 14:45, Alex Elder wrote:
> On 6/22/20 8:04 PM, Rishabh Bhatnagar wrote:
>> Currently there is a single notification chain which is called 
>> whenever any
>> remoteproc shuts down. This leads to all the listeners being notified, 
>> and
>> is not an optimal design as kernel drivers might only be interested in
>> listening to notifications from a particular remoteproc. Create a 
>> global
>> list of remoteproc notification info data structures. This will hold 
>> the
>> name and notifier_list information for a particular remoteproc. The 
>> API
>> to register for notifications will use name argument to retrieve the
>> notification info data structure and the notifier block will be added 
>> to
>> that data structure's notification chain. Also move from blocking 
>> notifier
>> to srcu notifer based implementation to support dynamic notifier head
>> creation.
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Siddharth Gupta <sidgup@...eaurora.org>
>> Signed-off-by: Rishabh Bhatnagar <rishabhb@...eaurora.org>
> 
> Sorry, a few more comments, but I think your next one will
> likely be fine.
> 
> General:
> - SSR subsystems are added but never removed.  Note that
>   "qcom_common.o" can be built as a module, and if that
>   module were ever removed, memory allocated for these
>   subsystems would be leaked.
Hi Alex,
Thank you for reviewing this patchset quickly. This point was
brought up by Bjorn and it was decided that I will push another patch on
top in which I'll do the cleanup during module exit.
> - Will a remoteproc subdev (and in particular, an SSR subdev)
>   ever be removed?  What happens to entities that have
>   registered for SSR notifications in that case?
In practice it should never be removed. If it is clients will
never get notification about subsystem shutdown/powerup.
> 
> (Maybe these are issues that won't/can't occur in practice?)
> 
>> ---
>>   drivers/remoteproc/qcom_common.c      | 86 
>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------
>>   drivers/remoteproc/qcom_common.h      |  5 +-
>>   include/linux/remoteproc/qcom_rproc.h | 20 ++++++--
>>   3 files changed, 91 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
>> 
>> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/qcom_common.c 
>> b/drivers/remoteproc/qcom_common.c
>> index 9028cea..658f2ca 100644
>> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/qcom_common.c
>> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/qcom_common.c
>> @@ -12,6 +12,7 @@
>>   #include <linux/module.h>
>>   #include <linux/notifier.h>
>>   #include <linux/remoteproc.h>
>> +#include <linux/remoteproc/qcom_rproc.h>
>>   #include <linux/rpmsg/qcom_glink.h>
>>   #include <linux/rpmsg/qcom_smd.h>
>>   #include <linux/soc/qcom/mdt_loader.h>
>> @@ -23,7 +24,14 @@
>>   #define to_smd_subdev(d) container_of(d, struct qcom_rproc_subdev, 
>> subdev)
>>   #define to_ssr_subdev(d) container_of(d, struct qcom_rproc_ssr, 
>> subdev)
>>   -static BLOCKING_NOTIFIER_HEAD(ssr_notifiers);
>> +struct qcom_ssr_subsystem {
>> +	const char *name;
>> +	struct srcu_notifier_head notifier_list;
>> +	struct list_head list;
>> +};
>> +
>> +static LIST_HEAD(qcom_ssr_subsystem_list);
>> +static DEFINE_MUTEX(qcom_ssr_subsys_lock);
>>     static int glink_subdev_start(struct rproc_subdev *subdev)
>>   {
>> @@ -189,37 +197,80 @@ void qcom_remove_smd_subdev(struct rproc *rproc, 
>> struct qcom_rproc_subdev *smd)
>>   }
>>   EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(qcom_remove_smd_subdev);
>>   +static struct qcom_ssr_subsystem *qcom_ssr_get_subsys(const char 
>> *name)
>> +{
>> +	struct qcom_ssr_subsystem *info;
>> +
>> +	mutex_lock(&qcom_ssr_subsys_lock);
>> +	/* Match in the global qcom_ssr_subsystem_list with name */
>> +	list_for_each_entry(info, &qcom_ssr_subsystem_list, list)
>> +		if (!strcmp(info->name, name))
>> +			return info;
> 
> You need to unlock the mutex here.  You would probably
> be better off structuring this with a common exit path
> below, for example:
> 
> 		if (!strcmp(info->name, name))
> 			goto out_mutex_unlock;
> 
> 	. . .
> 
> out_mutex_unlock:
> 	mutex_unlock(&qcom_ssr_subsys_lock);
> 
> 	return info;
> }
> 
>> +
>> +	info = kzalloc(sizeof(*info), GFP_KERNEL);
>> +	if (!info)
>> +		return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);
> 
> Here too.  Perhaps this:
> 
> 	if (!info) {
> 		info = ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);
> 		goto out_mutex_unlock;
> 	}
> 
>> +	info->name = kstrdup_const(name, GFP_KERNEL);
>> +	srcu_init_notifier_head(&info->notifier_list);
>> +
>> +	/* Add to global notification list */
>> +	list_add_tail(&info->list, &qcom_ssr_subsystem_list);
>> +	mutex_unlock(&qcom_ssr_subsys_lock);
>> +
>> +	return info;
>> +}
>> +
>>   /**
>>    * qcom_register_ssr_notifier() - register SSR notification handler
>> - * @nb:		notifier_block to notify for restart notifications
>> + * @name:	Subsystem's SSR name
>> + * @nb:		notifier_block to be invoked upon subsystem's state change
>>    *
>> - * Returns 0 on success, negative errno on failure.
>> + * This registers the @nb notifier block as part the notifier chain 
>> for a
>> + * remoteproc associated with @name. The notifier block's callback
>> + * will be invoked when the remote processor's SSR events occur
>> + * (pre/post startup and pre/post shutdown).
>>    *
>> - * This register the @notify function as handler for restart 
>> notifications. As
>> - * remote processors are stopped this function will be called, with 
>> the SSR
>> - * name passed as a parameter.
>> + * Return: a subsystem cookie on success, ERR_PTR on failure.
>>    */
>> -int qcom_register_ssr_notifier(struct notifier_block *nb)
>> +void *qcom_register_ssr_notifier(const char *name, struct 
>> notifier_block *nb)
>>   {
>> -	return blocking_notifier_chain_register(&ssr_notifiers, nb);
>> +	struct qcom_ssr_subsystem *info;
>> +
>> +	info = qcom_ssr_get_subsys(name);
>> +	if (IS_ERR(info))
>> +		return info;
>> +
>> +	srcu_notifier_chain_register(&info->notifier_list, nb);
>> +
>> +	return &info->notifier_list;
>>   }
>>   EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(qcom_register_ssr_notifier);
>>     /**
>>    * qcom_unregister_ssr_notifier() - unregister SSR notification 
>> handler
>> + * @notify:	subsystem coookie returned from 
>> qcom_register_ssr_notifier
>>    * @nb:		notifier_block to unregister
>> + *
>> + * This function will unregister the notifier from the particular 
>> notifier
>> + * chain.
>> + *
>> + * Return: 0 on success, %ENOENT otherwise.
>>    */
>> -void qcom_unregister_ssr_notifier(struct notifier_block *nb)
>> +int qcom_unregister_ssr_notifier(void *notify, struct notifier_block 
>> *nb)
>>   {
>> -	blocking_notifier_chain_unregister(&ssr_notifiers, nb);
>> +	return srcu_notifier_chain_unregister(notify, nb);
>>   }
>>   EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(qcom_unregister_ssr_notifier);
>>     static void ssr_notify_unprepare(struct rproc_subdev *subdev)
>>   {
>>   	struct qcom_rproc_ssr *ssr = to_ssr_subdev(subdev);
>> +	struct qcom_ssr_notif_data data = {
> 
> It's defined in "qcom_rproc.h", but how about naming this type
> qcom_ssr_notify_data (or even just qcom_ssr_notify).
> 
Ok "qcom_ssr_notify_data" sounds fine.
>> +		.name = ssr->info->name,
>> +		.crashed = false,
>> +	};
>>   -	blocking_notifier_call_chain(&ssr_notifiers, 0, (void 
>> *)ssr->name);
>> +	srcu_notifier_call_chain(&ssr->info->notifier_list, 0, &data);
>>   }
>>     /**
>> @@ -229,12 +280,20 @@ static void ssr_notify_unprepare(struct 
>> rproc_subdev *subdev)
>>    * @ssr_name:	identifier to use for notifications originating from 
>> @rproc
>>    *
>>    * As the @ssr is registered with the @rproc SSR events will be sent 
>> to all
>> - * registered listeners in the system as the remoteproc is shut down.
>> + * registered listeners for the particular remoteproc when it is 
>> shutdown.
> 
> I suggest rewording this comment to make it more general,
> considering the events are related to both startup and
> shutdown.  Scan through the file for other instances
> similar to this (I mentioned one previously).
> 
>>    */
>>   void qcom_add_ssr_subdev(struct rproc *rproc, struct qcom_rproc_ssr 
>> *ssr,
>>   			 const char *ssr_name)
>>   {
>> -	ssr->name = ssr_name;
>> +	struct qcom_ssr_subsystem *info;
>> +
>> +	info = qcom_ssr_get_subsys(ssr_name);
>> +	if (IS_ERR(info)) {
>> +		dev_err(&rproc->dev, "Failed to add ssr subdevice\n");
>> +		return;
>> +	}
>> +
>> +	ssr->info = info;
>>   	ssr->subdev.unprepare = ssr_notify_unprepare;
> 
> Probably all fields should be initialized each time (though
> I know you're initializing them in the next patch, so I
> guess it's fine...).
> 
> 					-Alex
> 
>>   	rproc_add_subdev(rproc, &ssr->subdev);
>> @@ -249,6 +308,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(qcom_add_ssr_subdev);
>>   void qcom_remove_ssr_subdev(struct rproc *rproc, struct 
>> qcom_rproc_ssr *ssr)
>>   {
>>   	rproc_remove_subdev(rproc, &ssr->subdev);
>> +	ssr->info = NULL;
>>   }
>>   EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(qcom_remove_ssr_subdev);
>>   diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/qcom_common.h 
>> b/drivers/remoteproc/qcom_common.h
>> index 34e5188..dfc641c 100644
>> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/qcom_common.h
>> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/qcom_common.h
>> @@ -26,10 +26,11 @@ struct qcom_rproc_subdev {
>>   	struct qcom_smd_edge *edge;
>>   };
>>   +struct qcom_ssr_subsystem;
>> +
>>   struct qcom_rproc_ssr {
>>   	struct rproc_subdev subdev;
>> -
>> -	const char *name;
>> +	struct qcom_ssr_subsystem *info;
>>   };
>>     void qcom_add_glink_subdev(struct rproc *rproc, struct 
>> qcom_rproc_glink *glink,
>> diff --git a/include/linux/remoteproc/qcom_rproc.h 
>> b/include/linux/remoteproc/qcom_rproc.h
>> index fa8e386..58422b1 100644
>> --- a/include/linux/remoteproc/qcom_rproc.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/remoteproc/qcom_rproc.h
>> @@ -5,17 +5,27 @@ struct notifier_block;
>>     #if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_QCOM_RPROC_COMMON)
>>   -int qcom_register_ssr_notifier(struct notifier_block *nb);
>> -void qcom_unregister_ssr_notifier(struct notifier_block *nb);
>> +struct qcom_ssr_notif_data {
>> +	const char *name;
>> +	bool crashed;
>> +};
>> +
>> +void *qcom_register_ssr_notifier(const char *name, struct 
>> notifier_block *nb);
>> +int qcom_unregister_ssr_notifier(void *notify, struct notifier_block 
>> *nb);
>>     #else
>>   -static inline int qcom_register_ssr_notifier(struct notifier_block 
>> *nb)
>> +static inline void *qcom_register_ssr_notifier(const char *name,
>> +					       struct notifier_block *nb)
>>   {
>> -	return 0;
>> +	return NULL;
>>   }
>>   -static inline void qcom_unregister_ssr_notifier(struct 
>> notifier_block *nb) {}
>> +static inline int qcom_unregister_ssr_notifier(void *notify,
>> +					       struct notifier_block *nb)
>> +{
>> +	return 0;
>> +}
>>     #endif
>> 

Powered by blists - more mailing lists