| Message ID | cover.1623698773.git.ojaswin98@gmail.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| Headers | show |
| Series | Request to review progress decoupling vchiq platform code | expand |
Hi, Am 14.06.21 um 21:32 schrieb Ojaswin Mujoo: > Greetings, > > I'm working on addressing item 10 of the following TODO list: > > drivers/staging/vc04-services/interface/TODO > > For reference, the task is: > > 10) Reorganize file structure: Move char driver to it's own file and join > both platform files > > The cdev is defined alongside with the platform code in vchiq_arm.c. It > would be nice to completely decouple it from the actual core code. For > instance to be able to use bcm2835-audio without having /dev/vchiq created. > One could argue it's better for security reasons or general cleanliness. It > could even be interesting to create two different kernel modules, something > the likes of vchiq-core.ko and vchiq-dev.ko. This would also ease the > upstreaming process. > > > This patch is the first step towards decoupling the platform and the cdev code. > It moves all the cdev related code from vchiq_arm.c to vchiq_dev.c. However, for > now, I have aimed to keep the functionality untouched, hence the platform code > still calls the cdev initialisation function, and isn't truly decoupled yet. > > The summary of the changes is as follows: > > > * Definition of functions and variables shared by cdev and platform > code are moved to vchiq_arm.h while declaration stays in vchiq_arm.c > > * Declaration and definition of functions and variables only used by > cdev code are moved to vchiq_dev.c file. > > * Defined vchiq_deregister_chrdev() and vchiq_register_chrdev(..) in > vchiq_dev.c which handle cdev creation and deletion. They are called by the > platfrom code during probe(). looks like this should be 3 separate patches. So you have the pure move at the end. > > > I mainly wanted to put this patch out to see if I have the right idea of the > task at hand and to ensure I'm heading into the right direction. I would love to > hear your thoughts and suggestions on this. Once I have some feedback on this, I > can accordingly work towards a newer version to completely decouple the code. > > Lastly, I had some questions related to the the task: > > 1. So regarding the following line in the TODO: > > "For instance to be able to use bcm2835-audio without having /dev/vchiq > created." > > I was wondering about the possible ways to achieve this. Specifically, I was > thinking of the following 2 ways: > > 1.1 Making a KConfig entry for Cdev creation, like CONFIG_VCHIQ_CDEV, and > then do something like: > > vchiq_probe(..) > { > /* platform init code */ > > #if defined(CONFIG_VCHIQ_CDEV) > > /* Call cdev register function */ > > #endif > } A common pattern is to keep the calls, but have "empty" definitions of the those functions in the header file in case CONFIG_VCHIQ_CDEV is not defined. > > 1.2 The second approach is creating an entirely separate module for the cdev, > as suggested in the TODO. > > So I'm just wondering what the right approach should be? > > 2. Second, I currently tested by installing my patches to a pi3 B+ and running > `cat /dev/vchiq` to compare the output with the original kernel. Also, to > see if the platform code works without the cdev code, I commented out the > call to vchiq_register_cdev() and made sure the platform device (and > children) was registered but the char device was not present. However, I'm > not sure if these tests are comprehensive enough. What would be the right way > to test my changes? Sounds okay, but a functional test is still necessary (tool is provided by Raspberry Pi OS): vchiq_test -f 10 vchiq_test -p 10 Regards Stefan
On Tue, Jun 15, 2021 at 12:06:14AM +0200, Stefan Wahren wrote: Hello, > Hi, > > Am 14.06.21 um 21:32 schrieb Ojaswin Mujoo: > > Greetings, > > > > I'm working on addressing item 10 of the following TODO list: > > > > drivers/staging/vc04-services/interface/TODO > > > > For reference, the task is: > > > > 10) Reorganize file structure: Move char driver to it's own file and join > > both platform files > > > > The cdev is defined alongside with the platform code in vchiq_arm.c. It > > would be nice to completely decouple it from the actual core code. For > > instance to be able to use bcm2835-audio without having /dev/vchiq created. > > One could argue it's better for security reasons or general cleanliness. It > > could even be interesting to create two different kernel modules, something > > the likes of vchiq-core.ko and vchiq-dev.ko. This would also ease the > > upstreaming process. > > > > > > This patch is the first step towards decoupling the platform and the cdev code. > > It moves all the cdev related code from vchiq_arm.c to vchiq_dev.c. However, for > > now, I have aimed to keep the functionality untouched, hence the platform code > > still calls the cdev initialisation function, and isn't truly decoupled yet. > > > > The summary of the changes is as follows: > > > > > > * Definition of functions and variables shared by cdev and platform > > code are moved to vchiq_arm.h while declaration stays in vchiq_arm.c > > > > * Declaration and definition of functions and variables only used by > > cdev code are moved to vchiq_dev.c file. > > > > * Defined vchiq_deregister_chrdev() and vchiq_register_chrdev(..) in > > vchiq_dev.c which handle cdev creation and deletion. They are called by the > > platfrom code during probe(). > looks like this should be 3 separate patches. So you have the pure move > at the end. Got it, I'll split this into 3 commits: 1. Moving cdev code to a separate function 2. Moving to-be-shared declarations to vchiq_arm.h 3. Finally, moving cdev related code to vchiq_dev.c > > > > > > I mainly wanted to put this patch out to see if I have the right idea of the > > task at hand and to ensure I'm heading into the right direction. I would love to > > hear your thoughts and suggestions on this. Once I have some feedback on this, I > > can accordingly work towards a newer version to completely decouple the code. > > > > Lastly, I had some questions related to the the task: > > > > 1. So regarding the following line in the TODO: > > > > "For instance to be able to use bcm2835-audio without having /dev/vchiq > > created." > > > > I was wondering about the possible ways to achieve this. Specifically, I was > > thinking of the following 2 ways: > > > > 1.1 Making a KConfig entry for Cdev creation, like CONFIG_VCHIQ_CDEV, and > > then do something like: > > > > vchiq_probe(..) > > { > > /* platform init code */ > > > > #if defined(CONFIG_VCHIQ_CDEV) > > > > /* Call cdev register function */ > > > > #endif > > } > A common pattern is to keep the calls, but have "empty" definitions of > the those functions in the header file in case CONFIG_VCHIQ_CDEV is not > defined. Ahh okay, I'll try to do that. > > > > 1.2 The second approach is creating an entirely separate module for the cdev, > > as suggested in the TODO. > > > > So I'm just wondering what the right approach should be? > > > > 2. Second, I currently tested by installing my patches to a pi3 B+ and running > > `cat /dev/vchiq` to compare the output with the original kernel. Also, to > > see if the platform code works without the cdev code, I commented out the > > call to vchiq_register_cdev() and made sure the platform device (and > > children) was registered but the char device was not present. However, I'm > > not sure if these tests are comprehensive enough. What would be the right way > > to test my changes? > > Sounds okay, but a functional test is still necessary (tool is provided > by Raspberry Pi OS): > > vchiq_test -f 10 > vchiq_test -p 10 Perfect, this was what I was looking for, thank you! > > Regards > Stefan > > I believe, after splitting the patch, the next logical steps would be 1. Create a patch for adding CONFIG_VCHIQ_CDEV, but not splitting modules yet 2. After this, add a final patch to move cdev into it's own module 3. test test test I can play around with this and see how it goes. Thanks again for the help Stefan! Regards, Ojas
Greetings, I'm working on addressing item 10 of the following TODO list: drivers/staging/vc04-services/interface/TODO For reference, the task is: 10) Reorganize file structure: Move char driver to it's own file and join both platform files The cdev is defined alongside with the platform code in vchiq_arm.c. It would be nice to completely decouple it from the actual core code. For instance to be able to use bcm2835-audio without having /dev/vchiq created. One could argue it's better for security reasons or general cleanliness. It could even be interesting to create two different kernel modules, something the likes of vchiq-core.ko and vchiq-dev.ko. This would also ease the upstreaming process. This patch is the first step towards decoupling the platform and the cdev code. It moves all the cdev related code from vchiq_arm.c to vchiq_dev.c. However, for now, I have aimed to keep the functionality untouched, hence the platform code still calls the cdev initialisation function, and isn't truly decoupled yet. The summary of the changes is as follows: * Definition of functions and variables shared by cdev and platform code are moved to vchiq_arm.h while declaration stays in vchiq_arm.c * Declaration and definition of functions and variables only used by cdev code are moved to vchiq_dev.c file. * Defined vchiq_deregister_chrdev() and vchiq_register_chrdev(..) in vchiq_dev.c which handle cdev creation and deletion. They are called by the platfrom code during probe(). I mainly wanted to put this patch out to see if I have the right idea of the task at hand and to ensure I'm heading into the right direction. I would love to hear your thoughts and suggestions on this. Once I have some feedback on this, I can accordingly work towards a newer version to completely decouple the code. Lastly, I had some questions related to the the task: 1. So regarding the following line in the TODO: "For instance to be able to use bcm2835-audio without having /dev/vchiq created." I was wondering about the possible ways to achieve this. Specifically, I was thinking of the following 2 ways: 1.1 Making a KConfig entry for Cdev creation, like CONFIG_VCHIQ_CDEV, and then do something like: vchiq_probe(..) { /* platform init code */ #if defined(CONFIG_VCHIQ_CDEV) /* Call cdev register function */ #endif } 1.2 The second approach is creating an entirely separate module for the cdev, as suggested in the TODO. So I'm just wondering what the right approach should be? 2. Second, I currently tested by installing my patches to a pi3 B+ and running `cat /dev/vchiq` to compare the output with the original kernel. Also, to see if the platform code works without the cdev code, I commented out the call to vchiq_register_cdev() and made sure the platform device (and children) was registered but the char device was not present. However, I'm not sure if these tests are comprehensive enough. What would be the right way to test my changes? 3. Lastly, I think the git diff is acting up a bit because of the code rearrangement. I tried to check online if this is normal or if I messed it up somehow, but couldn't find much. Can someone please confirm this? Thank you in advance for looking into this and for helping me out upto this point! Regards, Ojaswin Ojaswin Mujoo (1): staging: vchiq: Move vchiq char driver to its own file drivers/staging/vc04_services/Makefile | 1 + .../interface/vchiq_arm/vchiq_arm.c | 1885 ++--------------- .../interface/vchiq_arm/vchiq_arm.h | 73 + .../interface/vchiq_arm/vchiq_dev.c | 1488 +++++++++++++ 4 files changed, 1770 insertions(+), 1677 deletions(-) create mode 100644 drivers/staging/vc04_services/interface/vchiq_arm/vchiq_dev.c