Re: [PATCH 1/4] platform/chrome: Add EC command msg wrapper

[Prashant Malani]

Hi Enric,

Here is the series: https://www.spinics.net/lists/kernel/msg3392039.html

Thanks!

On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 12:58 PM Prashant Malani <pmalani@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 12:57 PM Enric Balletbo Serra <eballetbo@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> Missatge de Prashant Malani <pmalani@xxxxxxxxxxxx> del dia dt., 28 de
>> gen. 2020 a les 20:29:
>> >
>> > Hi Enric,
>> >
>> > On Mon, Jan 27, 2020 at 12:36 PM Enric Balletbo Serra
>> > <eballetbo@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > Hi Prashant,
>> > >
>> > > Missatge de Prashant Malani <pmalani@xxxxxxxxxxxx> del dia dl., 27 de
>> > > gen. 2020 a les 18:13:
>> > > >
>> > > > Hi Enric,
>> > > >
>> > > > On Mon, Jan 27, 2020 at 7:29 AM Enric Balletbo i Serra
>> > > > <enric.balletbo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Hi Prashant,
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Many thanks for this patch.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > On 25/1/20 2:21, Prashant Malani wrote:
>> > > > > > Many callers of cros_ec_cmd_xfer_status() use a similar set up of
>> > > > > > allocating and filling a message buffer and then copying any received
>> > > > > > data to a target buffer.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > > cros_ec_cmd_xfer_status is already a wrapper, I dislike the idea of having three
>> > > > > ways to do the same (cros_ec_cmd_xfer, cros_ec_cmd_xfer_status and this new
>> > > > > one). I like the idea of have a wrapper that embeds the message allocation but
>> > > > > we should not confuse users with different calls that does the same.
>> > > > Yes, my intention was to eventually replace all the xfer_status()
>> > > > call-sites to use the new wrapper, and then get rid of xfer_status
>> > > > completely.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > So, I am for a change like this but I'd like to have all the users calling the
>> > > > > same wrapper (unless there is a good reason to not use it). A proposed roadmap
>> > > > > (to be discussed) for this would be.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > 1. Replace all the remaining "cros_ec_cmd_xfer" calls with
>> > > > > "cros_ec_cmd_xfer_status".
>> > > > > 2. Modify cros_ec_cmd_xfer_status to embed the message allocation.
>> > > >
>> > > > How about the following alteration the the roadmap:
>> > > > - Introducing the new wrapper.
>> > > > - Replacing all remaining cros_ec_cmd_xfer/cros_ec_cmd_xfer_status to
>> > > > use the new wrapper.
>> > > > - Deleting cros_ec_cmd_xfer and cros_ec_cmd_xfer_status ?
>> > > > My thinking is that this would mean fewer changes at the call-sites
>> > > > compared to the original roadmap (in the original roadmap, one would
>> > > > first have to modify calls to use cros_ec_cmd_xfer_status(), and then
>> > > > modify them again when cros_ec_cmd_xfer_status() itself is modified to
>> > > > include message allocation).
>> > > >
>> > >
>> > > Sounds like we have a plan, looks good to me.
>> > >
>> > Great. Can we use the current series as a starting point for this ?
>>
>> I'd prefer have all the replacements in the same series.
>
> Thanks for the clarification. I'll work on this.
>
> Best,
>
> -Prashant
>>
>>
>> > I've identified some of the other places which use
>> > cros_ec_cmd_xfer_status() so can submit subsequent series to convert
>> > those.
>> > > Cheers,
>> > >  Enric
>> > >
>> > > > That said I don't have any strong preference, so either would work.
>> > > >
>> > > > Best regards,
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Thanks,
>> > > > >  Enric
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > > > Create a utility function that performs this setup so that callers can
>> > > > > > use this function instead.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Signed-off-by: Prashant Malani <pmalani@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> > > > > > ---
>> > > > > >  drivers/platform/chrome/cros_ec_proto.c     | 53 +++++++++++++++++++++
>> > > > > >  include/linux/platform_data/cros_ec_proto.h |  5 ++
>> > > > > >  2 files changed, 58 insertions(+)
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/platform/chrome/cros_ec_proto.c b/drivers/platform/chrome/cros_ec_proto.c
>> > > > > > index da1b1c4504333..8ef3b7d27d260 100644
>> > > > > > --- a/drivers/platform/chrome/cros_ec_proto.c
>> > > > > > +++ b/drivers/platform/chrome/cros_ec_proto.c
>> > > > > > @@ -5,6 +5,7 @@
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > >  #include <linux/delay.h>
>> > > > > >  #include <linux/device.h>
>> > > > > > +#include <linux/mfd/cros_ec.h>
>> > > > > >  #include <linux/module.h>
>> > > > > >  #include <linux/platform_data/cros_ec_commands.h>
>> > > > > >  #include <linux/platform_data/cros_ec_proto.h>
>> > > > > > @@ -570,6 +571,58 @@ int cros_ec_cmd_xfer_status(struct cros_ec_device *ec_dev,
>> > > > > >  }
>> > > > > >  EXPORT_SYMBOL(cros_ec_cmd_xfer_status);
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > +/**
>> > > > > > + * cros_ec_send_cmd_msg() - Utility function to send commands to ChromeOS EC.
>> > > > > > + * @ec: EC device struct.
>> > > > > > + * @version: Command version number (often 0).
>> > > > > > + * @command: Command ID including offset.
>> > > > > > + * @outdata: Data to be sent to the EC.
>> > > > > > + * @outsize: Size of the &outdata buffer.
>> > > > > > + * @indata: Data to be received from the EC.
>> > > > > > + * @insize: Size of the &indata buffer.
>> > > > > > + *
>> > > > > > + * This function is a wrapper around &cros_ec_cmd_xfer_status, and performs
>> > > > > > + * some of the common work involved with sending a command to the EC. This
>> > > > > > + * includes allocating and filling up a &struct cros_ec_command message buffer,
>> > > > > > + * and copying the received data to another buffer.
>> > > > > > + *
>> > > > > > + * Return: The number of bytes transferred on success or negative error code.
>> > > > > > + */
>> > > > > > +int cros_ec_send_cmd_msg(struct cros_ec_device *ec, unsigned int version,
>> > > > > > +                      unsigned int command, void *outdata,
>> > > > > > +                      unsigned int outsize, void *indata,
>> > > > > > +                      unsigned int insize)
>> > > > > > +{
>> > > > > > +     struct cros_ec_command *msg;
>> > > > > > +     int ret;
>> > > > > > +
>> > > > > > +     msg = kzalloc(sizeof(*msg) + max(outsize, insize), GFP_KERNEL);
>> > > > > > +     if (!msg)
>> > > > > > +             return -ENOMEM;
>> > > > > > +
>> > > > > > +     msg->version = version;
>> > > > > > +     msg->command = command;
>> > > > > > +     msg->outsize = outsize;
>> > > > > > +     msg->insize = insize;
>> > > > > > +
>> > > > > > +     if (outdata && outsize > 0)
>> > > > > > +             memcpy(msg->data, outdata, outsize);
>> > > > > > +
>> > > > > > +     ret = cros_ec_cmd_xfer_status(ec, msg);
>> > > > > > +     if (ret < 0) {
>> > > > > > +             dev_warn(ec->dev, "Command failed: %d\n", msg->result);
>> > > > > > +             goto cleanup;
>> > > > > > +     }
>> > > > > > +
>> > > > > > +     if (insize)
>> > > > > > +             memcpy(indata, msg->data, insize);
>> > > > > > +
>> > > > > > +cleanup:
>> > > > > > +     kfree(msg);
>> > > > > > +     return ret;
>> > > > > > +}
>> > > > > > +EXPORT_SYMBOL(cros_ec_send_cmd_msg);
>> > > > > > +
>> > > > > >  static int get_next_event_xfer(struct cros_ec_device *ec_dev,
>> > > > > >                              struct cros_ec_command *msg,
>> > > > > >                              struct ec_response_get_next_event_v1 *event,
>> > > > > > diff --git a/include/linux/platform_data/cros_ec_proto.h b/include/linux/platform_data/cros_ec_proto.h
>> > > > > > index 30098a5515231..166ce26bdd79e 100644
>> > > > > > --- a/include/linux/platform_data/cros_ec_proto.h
>> > > > > > +++ b/include/linux/platform_data/cros_ec_proto.h
>> > > > > > @@ -201,6 +201,11 @@ int cros_ec_cmd_xfer(struct cros_ec_device *ec_dev,
>> > > > > >  int cros_ec_cmd_xfer_status(struct cros_ec_device *ec_dev,
>> > > > > >                           struct cros_ec_command *msg);
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > +int cros_ec_send_cmd_msg(struct cros_ec_device *ec_dev, unsigned int version,
>> > > > > > +                      unsigned int command, void *outdata,
>> > > > > > +                      unsigned int outsize, void *indata,
>> > > > > > +                      unsigned int insize);
>> > > > > > +
>> > > > > >  int cros_ec_register(struct cros_ec_device *ec_dev);
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > >  int cros_ec_unregister(struct cros_ec_device *ec_dev);
>> > > > > >