On 11/10/2019 10:00 PM, Suman Anna wrote:
On 10/9/19 10:36 AM, Fabien Dessenne wrote:
The .is_running() ops expects a return value of 0 if the processor is running, 1 if not running : align to this.
Signed-off-by: Fabien Dessenne fabien.dessenne@st.com
This patch should be earlier than patch4, right?
You're probably right. I will double check this in v2.
Reviewed-by: Suman Anna s-anna@ti.com
drivers/remoteproc/stm32_copro.c | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/stm32_copro.c b/drivers/remoteproc/stm32_copro.c index eef3416..fce9653 100644 --- a/drivers/remoteproc/stm32_copro.c +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/stm32_copro.c @@ -237,14 +237,14 @@ static int stm32_copro_stop(struct udevice *dev) /**
- stm32_copro_is_running() - Is the STM32 remote processor running
- @dev: corresponding STM32 remote processor device
- @return 1 if the remote processor is running, 0 otherwise
- @return 0 if the remote processor is running, 1 otherwise
*/ static int stm32_copro_is_running(struct udevice *dev) { struct stm32_copro_privdata *priv;
priv = dev_get_priv(dev);
- return priv->is_running;
return !priv->is_running; }
static const struct dm_rproc_ops stm32_copro_ops = {