Re: [PATCH 4/4] remoteproc: debugfs: Add ability to boot remote processor using debugfs
From: Lee Jones <hidden>
Date: 2015-08-27 06:46:27
Also in:
linux-arm-kernel, lkml
On Wed, 26 Aug 2015, Nathan Lynch wrote:
On 08/26/2015 08:08 AM, Lee Jones wrote:quoted
Signed-off-by: Lee Jones <redacted> --- drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_debugfs.c | 25 +++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 25 insertions(+)The commit message should describe why this is needed...quoted
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.
Good points, will fix. -- Lee Jones Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel