RE: [PATCH 06/13] remoteproc: Introduce function __rproc_detach()

[Peng Fan]

> Subject: [PATCH 06/13] remoteproc: Introduce function __rproc_detach()
> 
> Introduce function __rproc_detach() to perform the same kind of operation as
> rproc_stop(), but instead of switching off the remote processor using
> rproc->ops->stop(), it uses
> rproc->ops->detach().  That way it is possible for the core
> to release the resources associated with a remote processor while the latter
> is kept operating.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c | 31
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 31 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> index bffaa9ea7c8f..7a1fc7e0620f 100644
> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> @@ -1641,6 +1641,37 @@ static int rproc_stop(struct rproc *rproc, bool
> crashed)
>  	return 0;
>  }
> 
> +/*
> + * __rproc_detach(): Does the opposite of rproc_attach()  */ static int
> +__maybe_unused __rproc_detach(struct rproc *rproc) {
> +	struct device *dev = &rproc->dev;
> +	int ret;
> +
> +	/* No need to continue if a detach() operation has not been provided */
> +	if (!rproc->ops->detach)
> +		return -EINVAL;
> +
> +	/* Stop any subdevices for the remote processor */
> +	rproc_stop_subdevices(rproc, false);
> +
> +	/* Tell the remote processor the core isn't available anymore */
> +	ret = rproc->ops->detach(rproc);
> +	if (ret) {
> +		dev_err(dev, "can't detach from rproc: %d\n", ret);
> +		rproc_start_subdevices(rproc);
> +		return ret;
> +	}
> +
> +	rproc_unprepare_subdevices(rproc);
> +
> +	rproc->state = RPROC_DETACHED;
> +
> +	dev_info(dev, "detached remote processor %s\n", rproc->name);
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}
> 
>  /**
>   * rproc_trigger_recovery() - recover a remoteproc
> --

Reviewed-by: Peng Fan <peng.fan@xxxxxxx>