[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <55170f1f-99f7-6e25-55d3-5d7247737afc@arm.com>
Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2022 18:53:03 +0100
From: Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@....com>
To: Mike Leach <mike.leach@...aro.org>
Cc: coresight@...ts.linaro.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mathieu.poirier@...aro.org,
peterz@...radead.org, mingo@...hat.com, acme@...nel.org,
linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org, leo.yan@...aro.org,
quic_jinlmao@...cinc.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 03/13] coresight: stm: Update STM driver to use Trace
ID API
On 06/10/2022 14:54, Mike Leach wrote:
> Hi Suzuki,
>
> On Mon, 3 Oct 2022 at 10:04, Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@....com> wrote:
>>
>> On 09/08/2022 23:33, Mike Leach wrote:
>>> Updates the STM driver to use the trace ID allocation API.
>>> This uses the _system_id calls to allocate an ID on device poll,
>>> and release on device remove.
>>>
>>> The sysfs access to the STMTRACEIDR register has been changed from RW
>>> to RO. Having this value as writable is not appropriate for the new
>>> Trace ID scheme - and had potential to cause errors in the previous
>>> scheme if values clashed with other sources.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Mike Leach <mike.leach@...aro.org>
>>> Reviewed-by: Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@....com>
>>> @@ -854,7 +830,7 @@ static void stm_init_generic_data(struct stm_drvdata *drvdata,
>>>
>>> static int stm_probe(struct amba_device *adev, const struct amba_id *id)
>>> {
>>> - int ret;
>>> + int ret, trace_id;
>>> void __iomem *base;
>>> struct device *dev = &adev->dev;
>>> struct coresight_platform_data *pdata = NULL;
>>> @@ -938,12 +914,22 @@ static int stm_probe(struct amba_device *adev, const struct amba_id *id)
>>> goto stm_unregister;
>>> }
>>>
>>> + trace_id = coresight_trace_id_get_system_id();
>>> + if (trace_id < 0) {
>>
>> The above API returns "INVALID_ID" and not a negative error status.
>> I think it is better to fix the API to return:
>>
>> ret < 0 - If there is any error
>> - Otherwise a positive integer
>> And the users should be kept unaware of which ID is valid or invalid.
>>
>
> coresight_trace_id_get_system_id() returns the ID if one can be
> allocated or -EINVAL if not.
>
> Not sure what you are looking at here.
Sorry, indeed I was mistaken there. It is the get_cpu_id() which
returns the INVALID_ID on failure. Please could we make that
consistent with this scheme ? i.e, < 0 on error.
Also, please could we add a comment above the exported functions
on their entry/exit criteria ? It is not clearly evident, unless
we follow the code and figure out.
Cheers
Suzuki
Powered by blists - more mailing lists