On 5/16/23 13:23, Stefan Herbrechtsmeier wrote:
Hi,
Am 16.05.2023 um 10:26 schrieb Michal Simek:
Hi,
first of all sorry for delay.
On 4/27/23 12:31, Stefan Herbrechtsmeier wrote:
From: Stefan Herbrechtsmeier stefan.herbrechtsmeier@weidmueller.com
Move the check of the permission to change a config object from zynqmp_pmufw_node function to zynqmp_pmufw_load_config_object function to simplify the code and check the permission only if required.
Signed-off-by: Stefan Herbrechtsmeier stefan.herbrechtsmeier@weidmueller.com
Changes in v3:
- Added
drivers/firmware/firmware-zynqmp.c | 32 +++++++++++++++--------------- 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/firmware/firmware-zynqmp.c b/drivers/firmware/firmware-zynqmp.c index 2b1ad5d2c3..d12159fa78 100644 --- a/drivers/firmware/firmware-zynqmp.c +++ b/drivers/firmware/firmware-zynqmp.c @@ -70,20 +70,11 @@ int zynqmp_pmufw_config_close(void) int zynqmp_pmufw_node(u32 id) { - static bool skip_config; - int ret;
- if (skip_config) - return 0;
/* Record power domain id */ xpm_configobject[NODE_ID_LOCATION] = id; - ret = zynqmp_pmufw_load_config_object(xpm_configobject, - sizeof(xpm_configobject));
- if (ret == -EACCES && id == NODE_OCM_BANK_0) - skip_config = true; + zynqmp_pmufw_load_config_object(xpm_configobject, + sizeof(xpm_configobject));
This is not right. It should be return zynqmp_pmufw_load... for error propagation.
At the moment the zynqmp_pmufw_node and zynqmp_pmufw_config_close doesn't return an error. Should the zynqmp_pmufw_load_config_object return 0 or -EACCES if it is skipped?
In context zynqmp_pmufw_node and it's dependency on returning EACESS for failure case which your code depends on here
+ if (zynqmp_pmufw_node(NODE_OCM_BANK_0) == -EACCES) { + printf("PMUFW: No permission to change config object\n"); + skip = true; + }
And for second part around skip and return code. I would say what you have is fine. It means returning -EACCES is appropriate here.
And as I see do_zynqmp_pmufw should also return that value. That command will simply fail if there is no permission.
And for close part I would say the same. Error should be propagated. I expect current command behavior when you call "pmufw node close" on regular system will just pass but it should just fail because command wasn't successful.
Thanks, Michal