Message-ID: <20200417113747.00007cfb@maquefel.me>
Date:   Fri, 17 Apr 2020 11:37:47 +0300
From:   Nikita Shubin <nikita.shubin@...uefel.me>
To:     Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@...aro.org>
Cc:     Nikita Shubin <NShubin@...con.com>,
        Ohad Ben-Cohen <ohad@...ery.com>,
        Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>,
        Shawn Guo <shawnguo@...nel.org>,
        Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>,
        Pengutronix Kernel Team <kernel@...gutronix.de>,
        Fabio Estevam <festevam@...il.com>,
        NXP Linux Team <linux-imx@....com>,
        linux-remoteproc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] remoteproc: imx_rproc: mailbox support

On Tue, 14 Apr 2020 11:20:05 -0600
Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@...aro.org> wrote:

> On Mon, Apr 06, 2020 at 02:33:09PM +0300, nikita.shubin@...uefel.me
> wrote:
> > Add support for mailboxes to imx_rproc
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Nikita Shubin <NShubin@...con.com>
> > ---
> >  drivers/remoteproc/Kconfig     |   2 +
> >  drivers/remoteproc/imx_rproc.c | 142
> > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 2 files changed, 143
> > insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/Kconfig b/drivers/remoteproc/Kconfig
> > index 94afdde4bc9f..02d23a54c9cf 100644
> > --- a/drivers/remoteproc/Kconfig
> > +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/Kconfig
> > @@ -17,6 +17,8 @@ if REMOTEPROC
> >  config IMX_REMOTEPROC
> >  	tristate "IMX6/7 remoteproc support"
> >  	depends on ARCH_MXC
> > +	select MAILBOX
> > +	select IMX_MBOX
> >  	help
> >  	  Say y here to support iMX's remote processors (Cortex M4
> >  	  on iMX7D) via the remote processor framework.
> > diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/imx_rproc.c
> > b/drivers/remoteproc/imx_rproc.c index bebc58d0f711..d2bede4ccb70
> > 100644 --- a/drivers/remoteproc/imx_rproc.c
> > +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/imx_rproc.c
> > @@ -14,6 +14,9 @@
> >  #include <linux/platform_device.h>
> >  #include <linux/regmap.h>
> >  #include <linux/remoteproc.h>
> > +#include <linux/mailbox_client.h>
> > +
> > +#include "remoteproc_internal.h"
> >  
> >  #define IMX7D_SRC_SCR			0x0C
> >  #define IMX7D_ENABLE_M4			BIT(3)
> > @@ -47,6 +50,12 @@
> >  
> >  #define IMX_BOOT_PC			0x4
> >  
> > +#define IMX_MBOX_NB_VQ			2
> > +#define IMX_MBOX_NB_MBX		2
> 
> Please align this.
> 
> > +
> > +#define IMX_MBX_VQ0		"vq0"
> > +#define IMX_MBX_VQ1		"vq1"
> > +
> >  /**
> >   * struct imx_rproc_mem - slim internal memory structure
> >   * @cpu_addr: MPU virtual address of the memory region
> > @@ -80,6 +89,14 @@ struct imx_rproc_dcfg {
> >  	size_t				att_size;
> >  };
> >  
> > +struct imx_mbox {
> > +	const unsigned char name[10];
> > +	struct mbox_chan *chan;
> > +	struct mbox_client client;
> > +	struct work_struct vq_work;
> > +	int vq_id;
> > +};
> > +
> >  struct imx_rproc {
> >  	struct device			*dev;
> >  	struct regmap			*regmap;
> > @@ -88,6 +105,8 @@ struct imx_rproc {
> >  	struct imx_rproc_mem
> > mem[IMX7D_RPROC_MEM_MAX]; struct clk			*clk;
> >  	void __iomem			*bootreg;
> > +	struct imx_mbox mb[IMX_MBOX_NB_MBX];
> > +	struct workqueue_struct *workqueue;
> >  };
> >  
> >  static const struct imx_rproc_att imx_rproc_att_imx7d[] = {
> > @@ -251,10 +270,118 @@ static void *imx_rproc_da_to_va(struct rproc
> > *rproc, u64 da, int len) return va;
> >  }
> >  
> > +static void imx_rproc_mb_vq_work(struct work_struct *work)
> > +{
> > +	struct imx_mbox *mb = container_of(work, struct imx_mbox,
> > vq_work);
> > +	struct rproc *rproc = dev_get_drvdata(mb->client.dev);
> > +
> > +	if (rproc_vq_interrupt(rproc, mb->vq_id) == IRQ_NONE)
> > +		dev_dbg(&rproc->dev, "no message found in vq%d\n",
> > mb->vq_id); +}
> > +
> > +static void imx_rproc_mb_callback(struct mbox_client *cl, void
> > *data) +{
> > +	struct rproc *rproc = dev_get_drvdata(cl->dev);
> > +	struct imx_mbox *mb = container_of(cl, struct imx_mbox,
> > client);
> > +	struct imx_rproc *ddata = rproc->priv;
> > +
> > +	queue_work(ddata->workqueue, &mb->vq_work);
> > +}
> > +
> > +static const struct imx_mbox imx_rproc_mbox[IMX_MBOX_NB_MBX] = {
> > +	{
> > +		.name = IMX_MBX_VQ0,
> > +		.vq_id = 0,
> > +		.client = {
> > +			.rx_callback = imx_rproc_mb_callback,
> > +			.tx_block = false,
> > +		},
> > +	},
> > +	{
> > +		.name = IMX_MBX_VQ1,
> > +		.vq_id = 1,
> > +		.client = {
> > +			.rx_callback = imx_rproc_mb_callback,
> > +			.tx_block = false,
> > +		},
> > +	},
> > +};
> > +
> > +static void imx_rproc_request_mbox(struct rproc *rproc)
> > +{
> > +	struct imx_rproc *ddata = rproc->priv;
> > +	struct device *dev = &rproc->dev;
> > +	unsigned int i;
> > +	const unsigned char *name;
> > +	struct mbox_client *cl;
> > +
> > +	/* Initialise mailbox structure table */
> > +	memcpy(ddata->mb, imx_rproc_mbox, sizeof(imx_rproc_mbox));
> > +
> > +	for (i = 0; i < IMX_MBOX_NB_MBX; i++) {
> > +		name = ddata->mb[i].name;
> > +
> > +		cl = &ddata->mb[i].client;
> > +		cl->dev = dev->parent;
> > +
> > +		ddata->mb[i].chan =
> > mbox_request_channel_byname(cl, name); +
> > +		dev_dbg(dev, "%s: name=%s, idx=%u\n",
> > +			__func__, name, ddata->mb[i].vq_id);
> > +
> > +		if (IS_ERR(ddata->mb[i].chan)) {
> > +			dev_warn(dev, "cannot get %s mbox\n",
> > name);
> > +			ddata->mb[i].chan = NULL;
> 
> If the mailbox isn't ready this driver will fail without a chance of
> recovery. Since most of the code in this patch is a carbon copy of
> the implementation found in stm32_proc.c, I suggest you do the same
> as they did in stm32_rproc_request_mbox() and privision for cases
> where requesting a channel returns -EPROBE_DEFER.
> 

Noted, will be fixed.

> > +		}
> > +
> > +		if (ddata->mb[i].vq_id >= 0)
> > +			INIT_WORK(&ddata->mb[i].vq_work,
> > imx_rproc_mb_vq_work);
> > +	}
> > +}
> > +
> > +static void imx_rproc_free_mbox(struct rproc *rproc)
> > +{
> > +	struct imx_rproc *ddata = rproc->priv;
> > +	unsigned int i;
> > +
> > +	dev_dbg(&rproc->dev, "%s: %d boxes\n",
> > +		__func__, ARRAY_SIZE(ddata->mb));
> > +
> > +	for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(ddata->mb); i++) {
> > +		if (ddata->mb[i].chan)
> > +			mbox_free_channel(ddata->mb[i].chan);
> > +		ddata->mb[i].chan = NULL;
> > +	}
> > +}
> > +
> > +static void imx_rproc_kick(struct rproc *rproc, int vqid)
> > +{
> > +	struct imx_rproc *ddata = rproc->priv;
> > +	unsigned int i;
> > +	int err;
> > +
> > +	if (WARN_ON(vqid >= IMX_MBOX_NB_VQ))
> > +		return;
> > +
> > +	for (i = 0; i < IMX_MBOX_NB_MBX; i++) {
> > +		if (vqid != ddata->mb[i].vq_id)
> > +			continue;
> > +		if (!ddata->mb[i].chan)
> > +			return;
> > +		dev_dbg(&rproc->dev, "sending message : vqid =
> > %d\n", vqid);
> > +		err = mbox_send_message(ddata->mb[i].chan, &vqid);
> > +		if (err < 0)
> > +			dev_err(&rproc->dev, "%s: failed (%s,
> > err:%d)\n",
> > +					__func__,
> > ddata->mb[i].name, err);
> > +			return;
> > +	}
> > +}
> > +
> >  static const struct rproc_ops imx_rproc_ops = {
> >  	.start		= imx_rproc_start,
> >  	.stop		= imx_rproc_stop,
> >  	.da_to_va	= imx_rproc_da_to_va,
> > +	.kick		= imx_rproc_kick,
> >  	.get_boot_addr	= rproc_elf_get_boot_addr,
> >  };
> >  
> > @@ -384,14 +511,26 @@ static int imx_rproc_probe(struct
> > platform_device *pdev) goto err_put_rproc;
> >  	}
> >  
> > +	priv->workqueue = create_workqueue(dev_name(dev));
> > +	if (!priv->workqueue) {
> > +		dev_err(dev, "cannot create workqueue\n");
> > +		ret = -ENOMEM;
> > +		goto err_put_clk;
> > +	}
> > +
> > +	imx_rproc_request_mbox(rproc);
> > +
> >  	ret = rproc_add(rproc);
> >  	if (ret) {
> >  		dev_err(dev, "rproc_add failed\n");
> > -		goto err_put_clk;
> > +		goto err_free_mb;
> >  	}
> >  
> >  	return 0;
> >  
> > +err_free_mb:
> > +	imx_rproc_free_mbox(rproc);
> > +	destroy_workqueue(priv->workqueue);
> >  err_put_clk:
> >  	clk_disable_unprepare(priv->clk);
> >  err_put_rproc:
> > @@ -407,6 +546,7 @@ static int imx_rproc_remove(struct
> > platform_device *pdev) 
> >  	clk_disable_unprepare(priv->clk);
> >  	rproc_del(rproc);
> > +	imx_rproc_free_mbox(rproc);
> 
> I have no issues with people reusing code already found in the kernel
> - in fact I encourage it because it makes reviewing patches much
> easier.  On the flip side you have to give credit where it is due.
> Here adding a line in the changelog that mentions where you took your
> inspiration from will be much appreciated.

Please don't blame on things i never did citing my own self from 0/0:

| Regarding mailboxes and memory regions :

| This code is heavily derived from stm32-rproc (i.e. copy pasted) and
| this fact needs to reflected in commits, please tell me how to
| emphasize this fact.

I am eager to give credits.


> 
> Thanks,
> Mathieu
> 
> >  	rproc_free(rproc);
> >  
> >  	return 0;
> > -- 
> > 2.25.1
> > 

Powered by blists - more mailing lists