lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Mar]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH] firmware: add a function to load optional firmware v2
From
Date
On 3/13/2018 5:46 PM, Kalle Valo wrote:
> "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@kernel.org> writes:
>
>> On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 03:16:34PM +0200, Kalle Valo wrote:
>>> "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@kernel.org> writes:
>>>
>>>>> +/**
>>>>> + * request_firmware_optional: - request for an optional fw module
>>>>> + * @firmware_p: pointer to firmware image
>>>>> + * @name: name of firmware file
>>>>> + * @device: device for which firmware is being loaded
>>>>> + *
>>>>> + * This function is similar in behaviour to request_firmware(), except
>>>>> + * it doesn't produce warning messages when the file is not found.
>>>>> + **/
>>>>> +int
>>>>> +request_firmware_optional(const struct firmware **firmware_p, const char *name,
>>>>> + struct device *device)
>>>>> +{
>>>>> + int ret;
>>>>> +
>>>>> + /* Need to pin this module until return */
>>>>> + __module_get(THIS_MODULE);
>>>>> + ret = _request_firmware(firmware_p, name, device, NULL, 0,
>>>>> + FW_OPT_UEVENT | FW_OPT_NO_WARN );
>>>>> + module_put(THIS_MODULE);
>>>>> + return ret;
>>>>> +}
>>>>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(request_firmware_optional);
>>>>
>>>> New exported symbols for the firmware API should be EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL().
>>>
>>> To me the word optional feels weird to me. For example, in ath10k I
>>> suspect we would be only calling request_firmware_optional() with all
>>> firmware and not request_firmware() at all.
>>>
>>> How about request_firmware_nowarn()? That would even match the
>>> documentation above.
>>
>> _nowarn() works with me. Do you at least want the return value to give
>> an error value if no file was found? This way the driver can decide
>> when to issue an error if it wants to.
>
> Yes, it would be very good to return the error value to ath10k. That way
> we can give a proper error message to the user if we can't find a
> suitable firmware image.

I fully agree with the _nowarn() and returning an error. However, the
firmware_p parameter (btw. do we really want the _p postfix?) is an
output parameter which will be null in case of an error so do you really
need a specific error code for the proper error message.

Regards,
Arend

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-03-14 09:25    [W:0.070 / U:1.588 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site