Re: [PATCH v4 3/5] remoteproc: qcom: Update PIL relocation info on load

[Stephen Boyd]

Quoting Bjorn Andersson (2020-03-09 23:33:36)
> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/qcom_q6v5_adsp.c b/drivers/remoteproc/qcom_q6v5_adsp.c
> index e953886b2eb7..d5cdff942535 100644
> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/qcom_q6v5_adsp.c
> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/qcom_q6v5_adsp.c
> @@ -164,10 +166,18 @@ static int qcom_adsp_shutdown(struct qcom_adsp *adsp)
>  static int adsp_load(struct rproc *rproc, const struct firmware *fw)
>  {
>         struct qcom_adsp *adsp = (struct qcom_adsp *)rproc->priv;
> +       int ret;
> +
> +       ret = qcom_mdt_load_no_init(adsp->dev, fw, rproc->firmware, 0,
> +                                   adsp->mem_region, adsp->mem_phys,
> +                                   adsp->mem_size, &adsp->mem_reloc);
> +       if (ret)
> +               return ret;
>  
> -       return qcom_mdt_load_no_init(adsp->dev, fw, rproc->firmware, 0,
> -                            adsp->mem_region, adsp->mem_phys, adsp->mem_size,
> -                            &adsp->mem_reloc);
> +       /* Failures only affect post mortem debugging, so ignore return value */
> +       qcom_pil_info_store(adsp->info_name, adsp->mem_reloc, adsp->mem_size);

If the return value was void then the comment wouldn't be necessary and
it would be self documenting as such. Can we do that?