On 1/18/23 15:13, Jassi Brar wrote:
On Wed, Jan 18, 2023 at 7:28 AM Michal Simek michal.simek@amd.com wrote:
Hi,
On 1/2/23 19:25, Jassi Brar wrote:
The patchset reduces ~400 lines of code, while keeping the functionality same and making meta-data operations much faster (by using cached structures).
Issue: meta-data copies (primary and secondary) are being handled by the backend/storage layer instead of the common core in fwu.c (as also noted by Ilias) that is, gpt_blk.c manages meta-data and similarly raw_mtd.c will have to do the same when it arrives. The code could by make smaller, cleaner and optimised.
Basic idea: Introduce .read_mdata() and .write_mdata() in fwu_mdata_ops that simply read/write meta-data copy. The core code takes care of integrity and redundancy of the meta-data, as a result we can get rid of every other callback .get_mdata() .update_mdata() .get_mdata_part_num() .read_mdata_partition() .write_mdata_partition() and the corresponding wrapper functions thereby making the code 100s of LOC smaller.
Get rid of fwu_check_mdata_validity() and fwu_mdata_check() which expected underlying layer to manage and verify mdata copies. Implement fwu_get_verified_mdata(struct fwu_mdata *mdata) public function that reads, verifies and, if needed, fixes the meta-data copies.
Verified copy of meta-data is now cached as 'g_mdata' in fwu.c, which avoids multiple low-level expensive read and parse calls. gpt meta-data partition numbers are now cached in gpt_blk.c, so that we don't have to do expensive part_get_info() and uid ops.
First of all I have strong suspicious that this series are pretty much two series at once.
Yes, I submitted two patchsets.
- Optimizing the api of current fwu.
- Introduce support for mtd backed storage (DeveloperBox platform as
an instance) using the new api.
They appear just fine in my inbox. Do they appear bad to you?
Take a look here. https://lore.kernel.org/all/20230102182532.2411125-1-jaswinder.singh@linaro.... where you can see two series in the same thread.
And this pretty much confuse b4.
The second issue is that you are sending patches from Jassi Brar jassisinghbrar@gmail.com but SOB is Signed-off-by: Jassi Brar jaswinder.singh@linaro.org
And Tom said in past that they should match. There is a hook for it to check it which everybody should be using. That's why please fix this in the next series.
I have submitted dozens of patches and pull requests over the last many years. This never occurred to anybody.
It really depends how you download that patches.
Thanks, Michal