Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-214857-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:4601:e00::3 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:4601:e00::3;
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
In-Reply-To: <104f23d7-9832-4c06-92c7-d3ea84fbf186@gmx.net>
References: <20240613194150.2915202-1-kieran.bingham@ideasonboard.com> <20240613194150.2915202-2-kieran.bingham@ideasonboard.com> <082d9df0-0947-4452-a3fc-87eab2019e01@gmx.net> <171836496531.2248009.11650291484570726735@ping.linuxembedded.co.uk> <104f23d7-9832-4c06-92c7-d3ea84fbf186@gmx.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] staging: vc04_services: vchiq_arm: Fix initialisation check
From: Kieran Bingham <kieran.bingham@ideasonboard.com>
Cc: Broadcom internal kernel review list <bcm-kernel-feedback-list@broadcom.com>, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>, Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com>, Dave Stevenson <dave.stevenson@raspberrypi.org>, detule <ogjoneski@gmail.com>, Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@linaro.org>, BROADCOM BCM2711/BCM2835 ARM ARCHITECTURE <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>, STAGING SUBSYSTEM <linux-staging@lists.linux.dev>, open list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
To: Florian Fainelli <florian.fainelli@broadcom.com>, Stefan Wahren <wahrenst@gmx.net>, Umang Jain <umang.jain@ideasonboard.com>, linux-rpi-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2024 13:00:19 +0100
Message-ID: <171836641941.2248009.7362589437453917188@ping.linuxembedded.co.uk>
User-Agent: alot/0.10

Quoting Stefan Wahren (2024-06-14 12:52:53)
> Hi Kieran,
>=20
> Am 14.06.24 um 13:36 schrieb Kieran Bingham:
> > Hi Stefan,
> >
> > Sorry, indeed I completely missed this mail.
> >
> > Quoting Stefan Wahren (2024-06-13 21:01:42)
> >> Hi Kieran,
> >>
> >> Am 13.06.24 um 21:41 schrieb Kieran Bingham:
> >>> The vchiq_state used to be obtained through an accessor
> >>> which would validate that the VCHIQ had been initialised
> >>> correctly with the remote.
> >>>
> >>> In commit 42a2f6664e18 ("staging: vc04_services: Move global g_state =
to
> >>> vchiq_state") the global state was moved to the vchiq_mgnt structures
> >>> stored as a vchiq instance specific context. This conversion removed =
the
> >>> helpers and instead replaced users of this helper with the assumption
> >>> that the state is always available and the remote connected.
> >>>
> >>> Fix this broken assumption by re-introducing the logic that was lost
> >>> during the conversion.
> >> thank you for sending this patch. Maybe it's worth to mention that this
> >> patch also drop some unnecessary NULL checks of state.
> > I don't understand this comment. Nothing is dropped is it?
> >
> > The newly added vchiq_remote_initialised() is itself a null-check too!
> the vchiq_remote_initialised() only checks the member remote, but not
> state itself. From my point of view the null-check for state is
> unnecessary, because most of the code already assumed that state is not
> null like e.g. in vchiq_open().
>=20

aha, I misread my own code ;-) Of course - I see it now.

I'll send v3.

--
Kieran