[RFC][PATCH 1/2] remoteproc: Reduce asynchronous request_firmware to auto-boot only

Bjorn Andersson bjorn.andersson at linaro.org
Mon Feb 6 13:08:37 PST 2017


On Tue 24 Jan 15:13 PST 2017, Sarangdhar Joshi wrote:

> The rproc_add_virtio_devices() requests firmware asynchronously and
> triggers boot if the auto_boot flag is set. However, this
> asynchronous call seems to be redundant for non auto-boot scenario
> since the rproc_boot() would call request_firmware() anyways. Move
> the auto_boot check to rproc_add() so that a redundant call to
> _request_firmware can be avoided for non auto-boot case.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Sarangdhar Joshi <spjoshi at codeaurora.org>

Looks good, applied both patches.

Regards,
Bjorn

> ---
> 
> I'm requesting RFC on this patch since I'm not aware of any scenario
> where we might need asynchronous firmware loading for non auto-boot case.
> 
>  drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c | 14 ++++++++------
>  1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> index f58e634..16242b0 100644
> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> @@ -970,9 +970,7 @@ static void rproc_fw_config_virtio(const struct firmware *fw, void *context)
>  {
>  	struct rproc *rproc = context;
>  
> -	/* if rproc is marked always-on, request it to boot */
> -	if (rproc->auto_boot)
> -		rproc_boot(rproc);
> +	rproc_boot(rproc);
>  
>  	release_firmware(fw);
>  }
> @@ -1286,9 +1284,13 @@ int rproc_add(struct rproc *rproc)
>  
>  	/* create debugfs entries */
>  	rproc_create_debug_dir(rproc);
> -	ret = rproc_add_virtio_devices(rproc);
> -	if (ret < 0)
> -		return ret;
> +
> +	/* if rproc is marked always-on, request it to boot */
> +	if (rproc->auto_boot) {
> +		ret = rproc_add_virtio_devices(rproc);
> +		if (ret < 0)
> +			return ret;
> +	}
>  
>  	/* expose to rproc_get_by_phandle users */
>  	mutex_lock(&rproc_list_mutex);
> -- 
> The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum,
> a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project
> 



More information about the linux-arm-kernel mailing list