| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-ID: <6f85f227-e244-8136-b0f4-0b6ab167d852@st.com>
Date: Mon, 4 May 2020 13:14:59 +0200
From: Arnaud POULIQUEN <arnaud.pouliquen@...com>
To: Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@...aro.org>
CC: <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>, <ohad@...ery.com>,
<loic.pallardy@...com>, <s-anna@...com>,
<linux-remoteproc@...r.kernel.org>, <corbet@....net>,
<linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 08/14] remoteproc: Call core functions based on
synchronisation flag
hi Mathieu,
On 4/30/20 9:57 PM, Mathieu Poirier wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 07:27:27PM +0200, Arnaud POULIQUEN wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 4/24/20 10:01 PM, Mathieu Poirier wrote:
>>> Call the right core function based on whether we should synchronise
>>> with a remote processor or boot it from scratch.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@...aro.org>
>>> ---
>>> drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_internal.h | 50 ++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>> 1 file changed, 50 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_internal.h b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_internal.h
>>> index dda7044c4b3e..3985c084b184 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_internal.h
>>> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_internal.h
>>> @@ -72,6 +72,12 @@ static inline bool rproc_needs_syncing(struct rproc *rproc)
>>> static inline
>>> int rproc_fw_sanity_check(struct rproc *rproc, const struct firmware *fw)
>>> {
>>> + if (rproc_needs_syncing(rproc)) {
>>> + if (rproc->sync_ops && rproc->sync_ops->sanity_check)
>>> + return rproc->sync_ops->sanity_check(rproc, fw);
>>> + return 0;
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> if (rproc->ops && rproc->ops->sanity_check)
>>> return rproc->ops->sanity_check(rproc, fw);
>>
>> Regarding this patch I'm trying to determine whether it makes sense to have ops or
>> sync_ops set to null. Your[v3 01/14] patch commit explains that ops can be null in case of
>> synchronisation.
>> But it seems deprecated with the sync_ops introduction...
>
> Your comment made me go over the logic again... If rproc_needs_syncing() is
> true then we necessarily have a sync_ops. If rproc_needs_syncing() is false,
> there too we automatically have an ops. As such and as you point out, checking
> for rproc->sync_ops and rproc-ops is probably useless.
An Additional test in rproc_set_state_machine should be sufficient, something like that:
/* rproc->ops struct is mandatory if at least one sync flag is false */
if (!rproc->ops && !(sync_flags.on_init &&
sync_flags.after_stop && sync_flags.after_crash))
return -EINVAL;
>
>>
>> And if sync_ops is null, is it still necessary to define a remoteproc device?
>
> Not sure I understand your point here but with the reasonning from above it
> is probably moot anyway.
Just to mention that a platform device with ops and ops_sync null seems like nonsense
Regards,
Arnaud
>
>>
>> Regards
>> Arnad
>>
>>>
>>> @@ -81,6 +87,12 @@ int rproc_fw_sanity_check(struct rproc *rproc, const struct firmware *fw)
>>> static inline
>>> u64 rproc_get_boot_addr(struct rproc *rproc, const struct firmware *fw)
>>> {
>>> + if (rproc_needs_syncing(rproc)) {
>>> + if (rproc->sync_ops && rproc->sync_ops->get_boot_addr)
>>> + return rproc->sync_ops->get_boot_addr(rproc, fw);
>>> + return 0;
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> if (rproc->ops && rproc->ops->get_boot_addr)
>>> return rproc->ops->get_boot_addr(rproc, fw);
>>>
>>> @@ -90,6 +102,12 @@ u64 rproc_get_boot_addr(struct rproc *rproc, const struct firmware *fw)
>>> static inline
>>> int rproc_load_segments(struct rproc *rproc, const struct firmware *fw)
>>> {
>>> + if (rproc_needs_syncing(rproc)) {
>>> + if (rproc->sync_ops && rproc->sync_ops->load)
>>> + return rproc->sync_ops->load(rproc, fw);
>>> + return 0;
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> if (rproc->ops && rproc->ops->load)
>>> return rproc->ops->load(rproc, fw);
>>>
>>> @@ -98,6 +116,12 @@ int rproc_load_segments(struct rproc *rproc, const struct firmware *fw)
>>>
>>> static inline int rproc_parse_fw(struct rproc *rproc, const struct firmware *fw)
>>> {
>>> + if (rproc_needs_syncing(rproc)) {
>>> + if (rproc->sync_ops && rproc->sync_ops->parse_fw)
>>> + return rproc->sync_ops->parse_fw(rproc, fw);
>>> + return 0;
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> if (rproc->ops && rproc->ops->parse_fw)
>>> return rproc->ops->parse_fw(rproc, fw);
>>>
>>> @@ -108,6 +132,13 @@ static inline
>>> int rproc_handle_rsc(struct rproc *rproc, u32 rsc_type, void *rsc, int offset,
>>> int avail)
>>> {
>>> + if (rproc_needs_syncing(rproc)) {
>>> + if (rproc->sync_ops && rproc->sync_ops->handle_rsc)
>>> + return rproc->sync_ops->handle_rsc(rproc, rsc_type,
>>> + rsc, offset, avail);
>>> + return 0;
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> if (rproc->ops && rproc->ops->handle_rsc)
>>> return rproc->ops->handle_rsc(rproc, rsc_type, rsc, offset,
>>> avail);
>>> @@ -119,6 +150,13 @@ static inline
>>> struct resource_table *rproc_find_loaded_rsc_table(struct rproc *rproc,
>>> const struct firmware *fw)
>>> {
>>> + if (rproc_needs_syncing(rproc)) {
>>> + if (rproc->sync_ops && rproc->sync_ops->find_loaded_rsc_table)
>>> + return rproc->sync_ops->find_loaded_rsc_table(rproc,
>>> + fw);
>>> + return NULL;
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> if (rproc->ops && rproc->ops->find_loaded_rsc_table)
>>> return rproc->ops->find_loaded_rsc_table(rproc, fw);
>>>
>>> @@ -127,6 +165,12 @@ struct resource_table *rproc_find_loaded_rsc_table(struct rproc *rproc,
>>>
>>> static inline int rproc_start_device(struct rproc *rproc)
>>> {
>>> + if (rproc_needs_syncing(rproc)) {
>>> + if (rproc->sync_ops && rproc->sync_ops->start)
>>> + return rproc->sync_ops->start(rproc);
>>> + return 0;
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> if (rproc->ops && rproc->ops->start)
>>> return rproc->ops->start(rproc);
>>>
>>> @@ -135,6 +179,12 @@ static inline int rproc_start_device(struct rproc *rproc)
>>>
>>> static inline int rproc_stop_device(struct rproc *rproc)
>>> {
>>> + if (rproc_needs_syncing(rproc)) {
>>> + if (rproc->sync_ops && rproc->sync_ops->stop)
>>> + return rproc->sync_ops->stop(rproc);
>>> + return 0;
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> if (rproc->ops && rproc->ops->stop)
>>> return rproc->ops->stop(rproc);
>>>
>>>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists