Re: [PATCH 4/4] remoteproc: debugfs: Add ability to boot remote processor using debugfs

From: Nathan Lynch
Date: Wed Aug 26 2015 - 13:10:20 EST


On 08/26/2015 08:08 AM, Lee Jones wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Lee Jones <lee.jones@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_debugfs.c | 25 +++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 25 insertions(+)

The commit message should describe why this is needed...


> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_debugfs.c b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_debugfs.c
> index 9d30809..9620962 100644
> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_debugfs.c
> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_debugfs.c
> @@ -88,8 +88,33 @@ static ssize_t rproc_state_read(struct file *filp, char __user *userbuf,
> return simple_read_from_buffer(userbuf, count, ppos, buf, i);
> }
>
> +static ssize_t rproc_state_write(struct file *filp, const char __user *userbuf,
> + size_t count, loff_t *ppos)
> +{
> + struct rproc *rproc = filp->private_data;
> + char buf[2];
> + int ret;
> +
> + ret = copy_from_user(buf, userbuf, 1);
> + if (ret)
> + return -EFAULT;
> +
> + switch (buf[0]) {
> + case '1':
> + ret = rproc_boot(rproc);
> + if (ret)
> + dev_warn(&rproc->dev, "Boot failed: %d\n", ret);
> + break;
> + default:
> + rproc_shutdown(rproc);
> + }
> +
> + return count;
> +}

... and I suggest that the user interface be reconsidered. If '1' means
"boot" and literally anything else means "shut down" then you can't add
operations in the future without potentially breaking things.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/