Received-SPF: softfail (google.com: domain of transitioning linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org does not designate 23.128.96.19 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.19;
Date:   Wed, 1 Jun 2022 11:41:59 -0600
From:   Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@linaro.org>
To:     Arnaud Pouliquen <arnaud.pouliquen@foss.st.com>
Cc:     Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@linaro.org>,
        linux-remoteproc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-stm32@st-md-mailman.stormreply.com,
        Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
        Stefano Stabellini <stefanos@xilinx.com>,
        Bruce Ashfield <bruce.ashfield@xilinx.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v5 2/4] remoteproc: core: Introduce
 rproc_register_rvdev function
Message-ID: <20220601174159.GD531268@p14s>
References: <20220406095446.1187968-1-arnaud.pouliquen@foss.st.com>
 <20220406095446.1187968-3-arnaud.pouliquen@foss.st.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20220406095446.1187968-3-arnaud.pouliquen@foss.st.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Apr 06, 2022 at 11:54:44AM +0200, Arnaud Pouliquen wrote:
> The rproc structure contains a list of registered rproc_vdev structure.

This should be rproc_rvdev.

> To be able to move the management of the rproc_vdev structure in
> remoteproc_virtio.c (i.e rproc_rvdev_add_device and
> rproc_rvdev_remove_device functions), introduce the rproc_register_rvdev
> and rproc_unregister_rvdev functions.

The name of those functions doesn't match the content of the patch.

> 
> Signed-off-by: Arnaud Pouliquen <arnaud.pouliquen@foss.st.com>
> ---
>  drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c | 16 ++++++++++++++--
>  1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> index 3a469220ac73..081bea39daf4 100644
> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> @@ -484,6 +484,18 @@ static int copy_dma_range_map(struct device *to, struct device *from)
>  	return 0;
>  }
>  
> +static void rproc_add_rvdev(struct rproc *rproc, struct rproc_vdev *rvdev)
> +{
> +	if (rvdev && rproc)
> +		list_add_tail(&rvdev->node, &rproc->rvdevs);
> +}
> +
> +static void rproc_remove_rvdev(struct rproc_vdev *rvdev)
> +{
> +	if (rvdev)
> +		list_del(&rvdev->node);
> +}
> +
>  static struct rproc_vdev *
>  rproc_rvdev_add_device(struct rproc *rproc, struct rproc_vdev_data *rvdev_data)
>  {
> @@ -547,7 +559,7 @@ rproc_rvdev_add_device(struct rproc *rproc, struct rproc_vdev_data *rvdev_data)
>  			goto unwind_vring_allocations;
>  	}
>  
> -	list_add_tail(&rvdev->node, &rproc->rvdevs);
> +	rproc_add_rvdev(rproc, rvdev);
>  
>  	rvdev->subdev.start = rproc_vdev_do_start;
>  	rvdev->subdev.stop = rproc_vdev_do_stop;
> @@ -576,7 +588,7 @@ static void rproc_rvdev_remove_device(struct rproc_vdev *rvdev)
>  	}
>  
>  	rproc_remove_subdev(rproc, &rvdev->subdev);
> -	list_del(&rvdev->node);
> +	rproc_remove_rvdev(rvdev);

With the above:

Reviewed-by: Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@linaro.org>

>  	device_unregister(&rvdev->dev);
>  }
>  
> -- 
> 2.25.1
>