| 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: <20200610204752.GA3670169@bogus>
Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2020 14:47:52 -0600
From: Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
To: Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@...aro.org>
Cc: Ben Levinsky <BLEVINSK@...inx.com>, Suman Anna <s-anna@...com>,
"ohad@...ery.com" <ohad@...ery.com>,
"bjorn.andersson@...aro.org" <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>,
Michal Simek <michals@...inx.com>,
Jolly Shah <JOLLYS@...inx.com>, Rajan Vaja <RAJANV@...inx.com>,
"mark.rutland@....com" <mark.rutland@....com>,
"linux-remoteproc@...r.kernel.org" <linux-remoteproc@...r.kernel.org>,
"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Jiaying Liang <jliang@...inx.com>,
"Ed T. Mooring" <emooring@...inx.com>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 5/5] remoteproc: Add initial zynqmp R5 remoteproc
driver
On Tue, Jun 09, 2020 at 09:47:02AM -0600, Mathieu Poirier wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Jun 2020 at 09:29, Ben Levinsky <BLEVINSK@...inx.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Suman, Mathieu,
> >
> > Thank you for your comments. Please see my replies inline.
> >
> > Best Regards,
> > Ben
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Suman Anna <s-anna@...com>
> > Sent: Monday, June 8, 2020 5:00 PM
> > To: Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@...aro.org>; Ben Levinsky <BLEVINSK@...inx.com>
> > Cc: ohad@...ery.com; bjorn.andersson@...aro.org; Michal Simek <michals@...inx.com>; Jolly Shah <JOLLYS@...inx.com>; Rajan Vaja <RAJANV@...inx.com>; robh+dt@...nel.org; mark.rutland@....com; linux-remoteproc@...r.kernel.org; linux-arm-kernell@...ts.infradead.org; devicetree@...r.kernel.org; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org; Jiaying Liang <jliang@...inx.com>; Michal Simek <michals@...inx.com>; Ed T. Mooring <emooring@...inx.com>; Jason Wu <j.wu@...inx.com>
> > Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 5/5] remoteproc: Add initial zynqmp R5 remoteproc driver
> >
> > On 6/8/20 6:49 PM, Mathieu Poirier wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jun 03, 2020 at 07:49:43AM -0700, Ben Levinsky wrote:
> > >> R5 is included in Xilinx Zynq UltraScale MPSoC so by adding this
> > >> remotproc driver, we can boot the R5 sub-system in different
> > >> configurations.
> > >>
> > >> Acked-by: Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@...inx.com>
> > >> Acked-by: Ben Levinsky <ben.levinsky@...inx.com>
> > >> Reviewed-by: Radhey Shyam Pandey <radhey.shyam.pandey@...inx.com>
> > >> Signed-off-by: Ben Levinsky <ben.levinsky@...inx.com>
> > >> Signed-off-by: Wendy Liang <wendy.liang@...inx.com>
> > >> Signed-off-by: Michal Simek <michal.simek@...inx.com>
> > >> Signed-off-by: Ed Mooring <ed.mooring@...inx.com>
> > >> Signed-off-by: Jason Wu <j.wu@...inx.com>
> > >> Tested-by: Ben Levinsky <ben.levinsky@...inx.com>
> > >> ---
> > >> v2:
> > >> - remove domain struct as per review from Mathieu
> > >> v3:
> > >> - add xilinx-related platform mgmt fn's instead of wrapping around
> > >> function pointer in xilinx eemi ops struct
> > >> v4:
> > >> - add default values for enums
> > >> - fix formatting as per checkpatch.pl --strict. Note that 1 warning and 1 check
> > >> are still raised as each is due to fixing the warning results in
> > >> that particular line going over 80 characters.
> > >> v5:
> > >> - parse_fw change from use of rproc_of_resm_mem_entry_init to
> > >> rproc_mem_entry_init and use of alloc/release
> > >> - var's of type zynqmp_r5_pdata all have same local variable name
> > >> - use dev_dbg instead of dev_info
> > >>
> > >> ---
> > >> drivers/remoteproc/Kconfig | 10 +
> > >> drivers/remoteproc/Makefile | 1 +
> > >> drivers/remoteproc/zynqmp_r5_remoteproc.c | 898 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > >> 3 files changed, 909 insertions(+)
> > >> create mode 100644 drivers/remoteproc/zynqmp_r5_remoteproc.c
> > >>
> > >> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/Kconfig b/drivers/remoteproc/Kconfig
> > >> index fbaed07..735bd7f 100644
> > >> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/Kconfig
> > >> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/Kconfig
> > >> @@ -240,6 +240,16 @@ config STM32_RPROC
> > >>
> > >> This can be either built-in or a loadable module.
> > >>
> > >> +config ZYNQMP_R5_REMOTEPROC
> > >> + tristate "ZynqMP_R5 remoteproc support"
> > >> + depends on ARM64 && PM && ARCH_ZYNQMP
> > >> + select RPMSG_VIRTIO
> > >> + select MAILBOX
> > >> + select ZYNQMP_IPI_MBOX
> > >> + help
> > >> + Say y here to support ZynqMP R5 remote processors via the remote
> > >> + processor framework.
> > >> +
> > >> endif # REMOTEPROC
> > >>
> > >> endmenu
> > >> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/Makefile
> > >> b/drivers/remoteproc/Makefile index 0effd38..806ac3f 100644
> > >> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/Makefile
> > >> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/Makefile
> > >> @@ -27,5 +27,6 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_QCOM_WCNSS_PIL) += qcom_wcnss_pil.o
> > >> qcom_wcnss_pil-y += qcom_wcnss.o
> > >> qcom_wcnss_pil-y += qcom_wcnss_iris.o
> > >> obj-$(CONFIG_ST_REMOTEPROC) += st_remoteproc.o
> > >> +obj-$(CONFIG_ZYNQMP_R5_REMOTEPROC) += zynqmp_r5_remoteproc.o
> > >> obj-$(CONFIG_ST_SLIM_REMOTEPROC) += st_slim_rproc.o
> > >> obj-$(CONFIG_STM32_RPROC) += stm32_rproc.o
> > >> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/zynqmp_r5_remoteproc.c
> > >> b/drivers/remoteproc/zynqmp_r5_remoteproc.c
> > >> new file mode 100644
> > >> index 0000000..0e4f3ad
> > >> --- /dev/null
> > >> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/zynqmp_r5_remoteproc.c
> > >> @@ -0,0 +1,898 @@
> > >> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> > >> +/*
> > >> + * Zynq R5 Remote Processor driver
> > >> + *
> > >> + * Copyright (C) 2019, 2020 Xilinx Inc. Ben Levinsky
> > >> +<ben.levinsky@...inx.com>
> > >> + * Copyright (C) 2015 - 2018 Xilinx Inc.
> > >> + * Copyright (C) 2015 Jason Wu <j.wu@...inx.com>
> > >> + *
> > >> + * Based on origin OMAP and Zynq Remote Processor driver
> > >> + *
> > >> + * Copyright (C) 2012 Michal Simek <monstr@...str.eu>
> > >> + * Copyright (C) 2012 PetaLogix
> > >> + * Copyright (C) 2011 Texas Instruments, Inc.
> > >> + * Copyright (C) 2011 Google, Inc.
> > >> + */
> > >> +
> > >> +#include <linux/atomic.h>
> > >> +#include <linux/cpu.h>
> > >> +#include <linux/dma-mapping.h>
> > >> +#include <linux/delay.h>
> > >> +#include <linux/err.h>
> > >> +#include <linux/firmware/xlnx-zynqmp.h> #include <linux/genalloc.h>
> > >> +#include <linux/idr.h> #include <linux/interrupt.h> #include
> > >> +<linux/kernel.h> #include <linux/list.h> #include
> > >> +<linux/mailbox_client.h> #include
> > >> +<linux/mailbox/zynqmp-ipi-message.h>
> > >> +#include <linux/module.h>
> > >> +#include <linux/of_address.h>
> > >> +#include <linux/of_irq.h>
> > >> +#include <linux/of_platform.h>
> > >> +#include <linux/of_reserved_mem.h>
> > >> +#include <linux/pfn.h>
> > >> +#include <linux/platform_device.h>
> > >> +#include <linux/remoteproc.h>
> > >> +#include <linux/skbuff.h>
> > >> +#include <linux/slab.h>
> > >> +#include <linux/sysfs.h>
> > >> +
> > >> +#include "remoteproc_internal.h"
> > >> +
> > >> +#define MAX_RPROCS 2 /* Support up to 2 RPU */
> > >> +#define MAX_MEM_PNODES 4 /* Max power nodes for one RPU memory instance */
> > >> +
> > >> +#define DEFAULT_FIRMWARE_NAME "rproc-rpu-fw"
> > >> +
> > >> +/* PM proc states */
> > >> +#define PM_PROC_STATE_ACTIVE 1U
> > >> +
> > >> +/* IPI buffer MAX length */
> > >> +#define IPI_BUF_LEN_MAX 32U
> > >> +/* RX mailbox client buffer max length */
> > >> +#define RX_MBOX_CLIENT_BUF_MAX (IPI_BUF_LEN_MAX + \
> > >> + sizeof(struct zynqmp_ipi_message))
> > >> +
> > >> +static bool autoboot __read_mostly;
> > >> +
> > >> +/**
> > >> + * struct zynqmp_r5_mem - zynqmp rpu memory data
> > >> + * @pnode_id: TCM power domain ids
> > >> + * @res: memory resource
> > >> + * @node: list node
> > >> + */
> > >> +struct zynqmp_r5_mem {
> > >> + u32 pnode_id[MAX_MEM_PNODES];
> > >> + struct resource res;
> > >> + struct list_head node;
> > >> +};
> > >> +
> > >> +/**
> > >> + * struct zynqmp_r5_pdata - zynqmp rpu remote processor private data
> > >> + * @dev: device of RPU instance
> > >> + * @rproc: rproc handle
> > >> + * @pnode_id: RPU CPU power domain id
> > >> + * @mems: memory resources
> > >> + * @is_r5_mode_set: indicate if r5 operation mode is set
> > >> + * @tx_mc: tx mailbox client
> > >> + * @rx_mc: rx mailbox client
> > >> + * @tx_chan: tx mailbox channel
> > >> + * @rx_chan: rx mailbox channel
> > >> + * @mbox_work: mbox_work for the RPU remoteproc
> > >> + * @tx_mc_skbs: socket buffers for tx mailbox client
> > >> + * @rx_mc_buf: rx mailbox client buffer to save the rx message */
> > >> +struct zynqmp_r5_pdata {
> > >> + struct device dev;
> > >> + struct rproc *rproc;
> > >> + u32 pnode_id;
> > >> + struct list_head mems;
> > >> + bool is_r5_mode_set;
> > >> + struct mbox_client tx_mc;
> > >> + struct mbox_client rx_mc;
> > >> + struct mbox_chan *tx_chan;
> > >> + struct mbox_chan *rx_chan;
> > >> + struct work_struct mbox_work;
> > >> + struct sk_buff_head tx_mc_skbs;
> > >> + unsigned char rx_mc_buf[RX_MBOX_CLIENT_BUF_MAX];
> > >> +};
> > >> +
> > >> +/**
> > >> + * table of RPUs
> > >> + */
> > >> +struct zynqmp_r5_pdata rpus[MAX_RPROCS];
> > >> +/**
> > >> + * RPU core configuration
> > >> + */
> > >> +enum rpu_oper_mode rpu_mode;
> > >> +
> > >> +/*
> > >> + * r5_set_mode - set RPU operation mode
> > >> + * @pdata: Remote processor private data
> > >> + *
> > >> + * set RPU oepration mode
> > >> + *
> > >> + * Return: 0 for success, negative value for failure */ static int
> > >> +r5_set_mode(struct zynqmp_r5_pdata *pdata) {
> > >> + u32 val[PAYLOAD_ARG_CNT] = {0}, expect, tcm_mode;
> > >> + struct device *dev = &pdata->dev;
> > >> + int ret;
> > >> +
> > >> + expect = (u32)rpu_mode;
> > >> + ret = zynqmp_pm_get_rpu_mode(pdata->pnode_id, 0, 0, val);
> > >> + if (ret < 0) {
> > >> + dev_err(dev, "failed to get RPU oper mode.\n");
> > >> + return ret;
> > >> + }
> > >> + if (val[0] == expect) {
> > >> + dev_dbg(dev, "RPU mode matches: %x\n", val[0]);
> > >> + } else {
> > >> + ret = zynqmp_pm_set_rpu_mode(pdata->pnode_id,
> > >> + expect, 0, val);
> > >> + if (ret < 0) {
> > >> + dev_err(dev,
> > >> + "failed to set RPU oper mode.\n");
> > >> + return ret;
> > >> + }
> > >> + }
> > >> +
> > >> + tcm_mode = (expect == (u32)PM_RPU_MODE_LOCKSTEP) ?
> > >> + PM_RPU_TCM_COMB : PM_RPU_TCM_SPLIT;
> > >> + ret = zynqmp_pm_set_tcm_config(pdata->pnode_id, tcm_mode, 0, val);
> > >> + if (ret < 0) {
> > >> + dev_err(dev, "failed to config TCM to %x.\n",
> > >> + expect);
> > >> + return ret;
> > >> + }
> > >> + pdata->is_r5_mode_set = true;
> > >> + return 0;
> > >> +}
> > >> +
> > >> +/**
> > >> + * r5_is_running - check if r5 is running
> > >> + * @pdata: Remote processor private data
> > >> + *
> > >> + * check if R5 is running
> > >> + *
> > >> + * Return: true if r5 is running, false otherwise */ static bool
> > >> +r5_is_running(struct zynqmp_r5_pdata *pdata) {
> > >> + u32 status, requirements, usage;
> > >> + struct device *dev = &pdata->dev;
> > >> +
> > >> + if (zynqmp_pm_get_node_status(pdata->pnode_id,
> > >> + &status, &requirements, &usage)) {
> > >> + dev_err(dev, "Failed to get RPU node %d status.\n",
> > >> + pdata->pnode_id);
> > >> + return false;
> > >> + } else if (status != PM_PROC_STATE_ACTIVE) {
> > >> + dev_dbg(dev, "RPU is not running.\n");
> > >> + return false;
> > >> + }
> > >> +
> > >> + dev_dbg(dev, "RPU is running.\n");
> > >> + return true;
> > >> +}
> > >> +
> > >> +/*
> > >> + * ZynqMP R5 remoteproc memory release function */ static int
> > >> +zynqmp_r5_mem_release(struct rproc *rproc,
> > >> + struct rproc_mem_entry *mem)
> > >> +{
> > >> + struct zynqmp_r5_mem *priv;
> > >> + int i, ret;
> > >> + struct device *dev = &rproc->dev;
> > >> +
> > >> + priv = mem->priv;
> > >> + if (!priv)
> > >> + return 0;
> > >> + for (i = 0; i < MAX_MEM_PNODES; i++) {
> > >> + if (priv->pnode_id[i]) {
> > >> + dev_dbg(dev, "%s, pnode %d\n",
> > >> + __func__, priv->pnode_id[i]);
> > >> + ret = zynqmp_pm_release_node(priv->pnode_id[i]);
> > >> + if (ret < 0) {
> > >> + dev_err(dev,
> > >> + "failed to release power node: %u\n",
> > >> + priv->pnode_id[i]);
> > >> + return ret;
> > >> + }
> > >> + } else {
> > >> + break;
> > >> + }
> > >> + }
> > >> + return 0;
> > >> +}
> > >> +
> > >> +/*
> > >> + * ZynqMP R5 remoteproc operations
> > >> + */
> > >> +static int zynqmp_r5_rproc_start(struct rproc *rproc) {
> > >> + struct device *dev = rproc->dev.parent;
> > >> + struct zynqmp_r5_pdata *pdata = rproc->priv;
> > >> + enum rpu_boot_mem bootmem;
> > >> + int ret;
> > >> + /* Set up R5 if not already setup */
> > >> + ret = pdata->is_r5_mode_set ? 0 : r5_set_mode(pdata);
> > >
> > > Is there any reason why r5_set_mode() has to be done as part of the
> > > start() function rather than at probe() time?
> > >
> > [Ben Levinsky] Can be done instead at probe. Will do.
> > >> + if (ret) {
> > >> + dev_err(dev, "failed to set R5 operation mode.\n");
> > >> + return ret;
> > >> + }
> > >> + if ((rproc->bootaddr & 0xF0000000) == 0xF0000000)
> > >> + bootmem = PM_RPU_BOOTMEM_HIVEC;
> > >> + else
> > >> + bootmem = PM_RPU_BOOTMEM_LOVEC;
> > >> + dev_dbg(dev, "RPU boot from %s.",
> > >> + bootmem == PM_RPU_BOOTMEM_HIVEC ? "OCM" : "TCM");
> > >> + ret = zynqmp_pm_request_wakeup(pdata->pnode_id, 1,
> > >> + bootmem, ZYNQMP_PM_REQUEST_ACK_NO);
> > >> + if (ret < 0) {
> > >> + dev_err(dev, "failed to boot R5.\n");
> > >> + return ret;
> > >> + }
> > >> + return 0;
> > >> +}
> > >> +
> > >> +static int zynqmp_r5_rproc_stop(struct rproc *rproc) {
> > >> + struct zynqmp_r5_pdata *pdata = rproc->priv;
> > >> + int ret;
> > >> +
> > >> + ret = zynqmp_pm_force_powerdown(pdata->pnode_id,
> > >> + ZYNQMP_PM_REQUEST_ACK_BLOCKING);
> > >> + if (ret < 0) {
> > >> + dev_err(&pdata->dev, "failed to shutdown R5.\n");
> > >> + return ret;
> > >> + }
> > >> + pdata->is_r5_mode_set = false;
> > >
> > > Why resetting this to false? If r5_set_mode() needs to be called
> > > every time the remote processor is booted, why carrying an extra variable (pdata->is_r5_mode_set)?
> > >
> > [Ben Levinsky] This is because the remote processor can be suspended. So when stopped this information should be stored.
> > >> + return 0;
> > >> +}
> > >> +
> > >> +static int zynqmp_r5_rproc_mem_alloc(struct rproc *rproc,
> > >> + struct rproc_mem_entry *mem) {
> > >> + struct device *dev = rproc->dev.parent;
> > >> + void *va;
> > >> +
> > >> + dev_dbg(rproc->dev.parent, "map memory: %pa\n", &mem->dma);
> > >> + va = ioremap_wc(mem->dma, mem->len);
> > >> + if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(va)) {
> > >> + dev_err(dev, "Unable to map memory region: %pa+%x\n",
> > >> + &mem->dma, mem->len);
> > >> + return -ENOMEM;
> > >> + }
> > >> +
> > >> + /* Update memory entry va */
> > >> + mem->va = va;
> > >> +
> > >> + return 0;
> > >> +}
> > >> +static int zynqmp_r5_rproc_mem_release(struct rproc *rproc,
> > >> + struct rproc_mem_entry *mem) {
> > >> + dev_dbg(rproc->dev.parent, "unmap memory: %pa\n", &mem->dma);
> > >> + iounmap(mem->va);
> > >> +
> > >> + return 0;
> > >> +}
> > >> +
> > >> +static int zynqmp_r5_parse_fw(struct rproc *rproc, const struct
> > >> +firmware *fw) {
> > >> + int num_mems, i, ret;
> > >> + struct zynqmp_r5_pdata *pdata = rproc->priv;
> > >> + struct device *dev = &pdata->dev;
> > >> + struct device_node *np = dev->of_node;
> > >> + struct rproc_mem_entry *mem;
> > >> + struct device_node *child;
> > >> + struct resource rsc;
> > >> +
> > >> + num_mems = of_count_phandle_with_args(np, "memory-region", NULL);
> > >> + if (num_mems <= 0)
> > >> + return 0;
> > >> + for (i = 0; i < num_mems; i++) {
> > >> + struct device_node *node;
> > >> + struct zynqmp_r5_mem *zynqmp_mem;
> > >> + struct reserved_mem *rmem;
> > >> + char rproc_name[20];
> > >> +
> > >> + node = of_parse_phandle(np, "memory-region", i);
> > >> + rmem = of_reserved_mem_lookup(node);
> > >> + if (!rmem) {
> > >> + dev_err(dev, "unable to acquire memory-region\n");
> > >> + return -EINVAL;
> > >> + }
> > >> +
> > >> + if (strstr(node->name, "vdev0buffer")) {
> > >> + /* Register DMA region */
> > >> + mem = rproc_mem_entry_init(dev, NULL,
> > >> + (dma_addr_t)rmem->base,
> > >> + rmem->size, rmem->base,
> > >> + NULL, NULL,
> > >> + "vdev0buffer");
> > >
> > > Out of sheer curiosity, why did you choose to use
> > > rproc_mem_entry_init() rather than rproc_of_resm_mem_entry_init()?
> > > After all the vdev0buffer is part of a reserved memory...
> > [Ben Levinsky] It is because rproc_mem_entry_init also sets DMA and virtual address fields.
> > >
> > > There is more comments further below. I'm out of time for today, I'll
> > > continue with the rest of zynmp_r5_parse_fw() tomorrow.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Mathieu
> > >
> > >> + if (!mem) {
> > >> + dev_err(dev, "unable to initialize memory-region %s\n",
> > >> + node->name);
> > >> + return -ENOMEM;
> > >> + }
> > >> + dev_dbg(dev, "parsed %s at %llx\r\n", mem->name,
> > >> + mem->dma);
> > >> + rproc_add_carveout(rproc, mem);
> > >> + continue;
> > >> + } else if (strstr(node->name, "vdev") &&
> > >> + strstr(node->name, "vring")) {
> > >> + int id, vring_id;
> > >> + char name[16];
> > >> +
> > >> + id = node->name[8] - '0';
> > >> + vring_id = node->name[14] - '0';
> > >> + snprintf(name, sizeof(name), "vdev%dvring%d", id,
> > >> + vring_id);
> > >> + /* Register vring */
> > >> + mem = rproc_mem_entry_init(dev, NULL,
> > >> + (dma_addr_t)rmem->base,
> > >> + rmem->size, rmem->base,
> > >> + zynqmp_r5_rproc_mem_alloc,
> > >> + zynqmp_r5_rproc_mem_release,
> > >> + name);
> > >> + dev_dbg(dev, "parsed %s at %llx\r\n", mem->name,
> > >> + mem->dma);
> > >> + rproc_add_carveout(rproc, mem);
> > >> + continue;
> > >> + } else {
> > >> + mem = rproc_mem_entry_init(dev, NULL,
> > >> + (dma_addr_t)rmem->base,
> > >> + rmem->size, rmem->base,
> > >> + zynqmp_r5_rproc_mem_alloc,
> > >> + zynqmp_r5_rproc_mem_release,
> > >> + node->name);
> > >> +
> > >> + if (!mem) {
> > >> + dev_err(dev,
> > >> + "unable to init memory-region %s\n",
> > >> + node->name);
> > >> + return -ENOMEM;
> > >> + }
> > >> + mem->of_resm_idx = i;
> > >> +
> > >> + rproc_add_carveout(rproc, mem);
> > >> + }
> > >> + }
> > >> +
> > >> + /* map TCM */
> > >> + for_each_available_child_of_node(np, child) {
> > >> + struct property *prop;
> > >> + const __be32 *cur;
> > >> + u32 pnode_id;
> > >> + void *va;
> > >> + dma_addr_t dma;
> > >> + resource_size_t size;
> > >> +
> > >> + ret = of_address_to_resource(child, 0, &rsc);
> > >> +
> > >> + i = 0;
> > >> + of_property_for_each_u32(child, "pnode-id", prop, cur,
> > >> + pnode_id) {
> > >> + ret = zynqmp_pm_request_node(pnode_id,
> > >> + ZYNQMP_PM_CAPABILITY_ACCESS, 0,
> > >> + ZYNQMP_PM_REQUEST_ACK_BLOCKING);
> > >> + if (ret < 0) {
> > >> + dev_err(dev, "failed to request power node: %u\n",
> > >> + pnode_id);
> > >> + return ret;
> > >> + }
> > >> + }
> > >> + size = resource_size(&rsc);
> > >> + va = devm_ioremap_wc(dev, rsc.start, size);
> > >> + if (!va)
> > >> + return -ENOMEM;
> > >> +
> > >> + /* zero out tcm base address */
> > >> + if (rsc.start & 0xffe00000) {
> > >> + rsc.start &= 0x000fffff;
> > >> + /* handle tcm banks 1 a and b
> > >> + * (0xffe9000 and oxffeb0000)
> > >> + */
> > >> + if (rsc.start & 0x80000)
> > >> + rsc.start -= 0x90000;
> > >> + }
> > >> +
> > >> + dma = (dma_addr_t)rsc.start;
> > >> + mem = rproc_mem_entry_init(dev, va, dma, (int)size, rsc.start,
> > >> + NULL, zynqmp_r5_mem_release,
> > >> + rsc.name);
> > >> + if (!mem)
> > >> + return -ENOMEM;
> > >> +
> > >> + rproc_add_carveout(rproc, mem);
> > >> + }
> > >> +
> > >> + ret = rproc_elf_load_rsc_table(rproc, fw);
> > >> + if (ret == -EINVAL)
> > >> + ret = 0;
> > >> + return ret;
> > >> +}
> > >> +
> > >> +/* kick a firmware */
> > >> +static void zynqmp_r5_rproc_kick(struct rproc *rproc, int vqid) {
> > >> + struct device *dev = rproc->dev.parent;
> > >> + struct zynqmp_r5_pdata *pdata = rproc->priv;
> > >> +
> > >> + dev_dbg(dev, "KICK Firmware to start send messages vqid %d\n",
> > >> +vqid);
> > >> +
> > >> + if (vqid < 0) {
> > >> + /* If vqid is negative, does not pass the vqid to
> > >> + * mailbox. As vqid is supposed to be 0 or possive.
> > >> + * It also gives a way to just kick instead but
> > >> + * not use the IPI buffer. It is better to provide
> > >> + * a proper way to pass the short message, which will
> > >> + * need to sync to upstream first, for now,
> > >> + * use negative vqid to assume no message will be
> > >> + * passed with IPI buffer, but just raise interrupt.
> > >> + * This will be faster as it doesn't need to copy the
> > >> + * message to the IPI buffer.
> > >> + *
> > >> + * It will ignore the return, as failure is due to
> > >> + * there already kicks in the mailbox queue.
> > >> + */
> > >> + (void)mbox_send_message(pdata->tx_chan, NULL);
> > >> + } else {
> > >> + struct sk_buff *skb;
> > >> + unsigned int skb_len;
> > >> + struct zynqmp_ipi_message *mb_msg;
> > >> + int ret;
> > >> +
> > >> + skb_len = (unsigned int)(sizeof(vqid) + sizeof(mb_msg));
> > >> + skb = alloc_skb(skb_len, GFP_ATOMIC);
> > >> + if (!skb) {
> > >> + dev_err(dev,
> > >> + "Failed to allocate skb to kick remote.\n");
> > >> + return;
> > >> + }
> > >> + mb_msg = (struct zynqmp_ipi_message *)skb_put(skb, skb_len);
> > >> + mb_msg->len = sizeof(vqid);
> > >> + memcpy(mb_msg->data, &vqid, sizeof(vqid));
> > >> + skb_queue_tail(&pdata->tx_mc_skbs, skb);
> > >> + ret = mbox_send_message(pdata->tx_chan, mb_msg);
> > >> + if (ret < 0) {
> > >> + dev_warn(dev, "Failed to kick remote.\n");
> > >> + skb_dequeue_tail(&pdata->tx_mc_skbs);
> > >> + kfree_skb(skb);
> > >> + }
> > >> + }
> > >> +}
> > >> +
> > >> +static struct rproc_ops zynqmp_r5_rproc_ops = {
> > >> + .start = zynqmp_r5_rproc_start,
> > >> + .stop = zynqmp_r5_rproc_stop,
> > >> + .load = rproc_elf_load_segments,
> > >> + .parse_fw = zynqmp_r5_parse_fw,
> > >> + .find_loaded_rsc_table = rproc_elf_find_loaded_rsc_table,
> > >> + .sanity_check = rproc_elf_sanity_check,
> > >> + .get_boot_addr = rproc_elf_get_boot_addr,
> > >> + .kick = zynqmp_r5_rproc_kick,
> > >> +};
> > >> +
> > >> +/* zynqmp_r5_mem_probe() - probes RPU TCM memory device
> > >> + * @pdata: pointer to the RPU remoteproc private data
> > >> + * @node: pointer to the memory node
> > >> + *
> > >> + * Function to retrieve resources for RPU TCM memory device.
> > >> + */
> > >> +static int zynqmp_r5_mem_probe(struct zynqmp_r5_pdata *pdata,
> > >> + struct device_node *node)
> > >> +{
> > >> + struct device *dev;
> > >> + struct zynqmp_r5_mem *mem;
> > >> + int ret;
> > >> + struct property *prop;
> > >> + const __be32 *cur;
> > >> + u32 val;
> > >> + int i = 0;
> > >> +
> > >> + dev = &pdata->dev;
> > >> + mem = devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof(*mem), GFP_KERNEL);
> > >> + if (!mem)
> > >> + return -ENOMEM;
> > >> + ret = of_address_to_resource(node, 0, &mem->res);
> > >> + if (ret < 0) {
> > >> + dev_err(dev, "failed to get resource of memory %s",
> > >> + of_node_full_name(node));
> > >> + return -EINVAL;
> > >> + }
> > >> +
> > >> + /* Get the power domain id */
> > >> + if (of_find_property(node, "pnode-id", NULL)) {
> > >> + of_property_for_each_u32(node, "pnode-id", prop, cur, val)
> > >> + mem->pnode_id[i++] = val;
> > >> + }
> > >> + list_add_tail(&mem->node, &pdata->mems);
> > >> + return 0;
> > >> +}
> > >> +
> > >> +/**
> > >> + * zynqmp_r5_release() - ZynqMP R5 device release function
> > >> + * @dev: pointer to the device struct of ZynqMP R5
> > >> + *
> > >> + * Function to release ZynqMP R5 device.
> > >> + */
> > >> +static void zynqmp_r5_release(struct device *dev) {
> > >> + struct zynqmp_r5_pdata *pdata;
> > >> + struct rproc *rproc;
> > >> + struct sk_buff *skb;
> > >> +
> > >> + pdata = dev_get_drvdata(dev);
> > >> + rproc = pdata->rproc;
> > >> + if (rproc) {
> > >> + rproc_del(rproc);
> > >> + rproc_free(rproc);
> > >> + }
> > >> + if (pdata->tx_chan)
> > >> + mbox_free_channel(pdata->tx_chan);
> > >> + if (pdata->rx_chan)
> > >> + mbox_free_channel(pdata->rx_chan);
> > >> + /* Discard all SKBs */
> > >> + while (!skb_queue_empty(&pdata->tx_mc_skbs)) {
> > >> + skb = skb_dequeue(&pdata->tx_mc_skbs);
> > >> + kfree_skb(skb);
> > >> + }
> > >> +
> > >> + put_device(dev->parent);
> > >> +}
> > >> +
> > >> +/**
> > >> + * event_notified_idr_cb() - event notified idr callback
> > >> + * @id: idr id
> > >> + * @ptr: pointer to idr private data
> > >> + * @data: data passed to idr_for_each callback
> > >> + *
> > >> + * Pass notification to remoteproc virtio
> > >> + *
> > >> + * Return: 0. having return is to satisfy the idr_for_each() function
> > >> + * pointer input argument requirement.
> > >> + **/
> > >> +static int event_notified_idr_cb(int id, void *ptr, void *data) {
> > >> + struct rproc *rproc = data;
> > >> +
> > >> + (void)rproc_vq_interrupt(rproc, id);
> > >> + return 0;
> > >> +}
> > >> +
> > >> +/**
> > >> + * handle_event_notified() - remoteproc notification work funciton
> > >> + * @work: pointer to the work structure
> > >> + *
> > >> + * It checks each registered remoteproc notify IDs.
> > >> + */
> > >> +static void handle_event_notified(struct work_struct *work) {
> > >> + struct rproc *rproc;
> > >> + struct zynqmp_r5_pdata *pdata;
> > >> +
> > >> + pdata = container_of(work, struct zynqmp_r5_pdata, mbox_work);
> > >> +
> > >> + (void)mbox_send_message(pdata->rx_chan, NULL);
> > >> + rproc = pdata->rproc;
> > >> + /*
> > >> + * We only use IPI for interrupt. The firmware side may or may
> > >> + * not write the notifyid when it trigger IPI.
> > >> + * And thus, we scan through all the registered notifyids.
> > >> + */
> > >> + idr_for_each(&rproc->notifyids, event_notified_idr_cb, rproc); }
> > >> +
> > >> +/**
> > >> + * zynqmp_r5_mb_rx_cb() - Receive channel mailbox callback
> > >> + * @cl: mailbox client
> > >> + * @mssg: message pointer
> > >> + *
> > >> + * It will schedule the R5 notification work.
> > >> + */
> > >> +static void zynqmp_r5_mb_rx_cb(struct mbox_client *cl, void *mssg) {
> > >> + struct zynqmp_r5_pdata *pdata;
> > >> +
> > >> + pdata = container_of(cl, struct zynqmp_r5_pdata, rx_mc);
> > >> + if (mssg) {
> > >> + struct zynqmp_ipi_message *ipi_msg, *buf_msg;
> > >> + size_t len;
> > >> +
> > >> + ipi_msg = (struct zynqmp_ipi_message *)mssg;
> > >> + buf_msg = (struct zynqmp_ipi_message *)pdata->rx_mc_buf;
> > >> + len = (ipi_msg->len >= IPI_BUF_LEN_MAX) ?
> > >> + IPI_BUF_LEN_MAX : ipi_msg->len;
> > >> + buf_msg->len = len;
> > >> + memcpy(buf_msg->data, ipi_msg->data, len);
> > >> + }
> > >> + schedule_work(&pdata->mbox_work);
> > >> +}
> > >> +
> > >> +/**
> > >> + * zynqmp_r5_mb_tx_done() - Request has been sent to the remote
> > >> + * @cl: mailbox client
> > >> + * @mssg: pointer to the message which has been sent
> > >> + * @r: status of last TX - OK or error
> > >> + *
> > >> + * It will be called by the mailbox framework when the last TX has done.
> > >> + */
> > >> +static void zynqmp_r5_mb_tx_done(struct mbox_client *cl, void *mssg,
> > >> +int r) {
> > >> + struct zynqmp_r5_pdata *pdata;
> > >> + struct sk_buff *skb;
> > >> +
> > >> + if (!mssg)
> > >> + return;
> > >> + pdata = container_of(cl, struct zynqmp_r5_pdata, tx_mc);
> > >> + skb = skb_dequeue(&pdata->tx_mc_skbs);
> > >> + kfree_skb(skb);
> > >> +}
> > >> +
> > >> +/**
> > >> + * zynqmp_r5_setup_mbox() - Setup mailboxes
> > >> + *
> > >> + * @pdata: pointer to the ZynqMP R5 processor platform data
> > >> + * @node: pointer of the device node
> > >> + *
> > >> + * Function to setup mailboxes to talk to RPU.
> > >> + *
> > >> + * Return: 0 for success, negative value for failure.
> > >> + */
> > >> +static int zynqmp_r5_setup_mbox(struct zynqmp_r5_pdata *pdata,
> > >> + struct device_node *node)
> > >> +{
> > >> + struct device *dev = &pdata->dev;
> > >> + struct mbox_client *mclient;
> > >> +
> > >> + /* Setup TX mailbox channel client */
> > >> + mclient = &pdata->tx_mc;
> > >> + mclient->dev = dev;
> > >> + mclient->rx_callback = NULL;
> > >> + mclient->tx_block = false;
> > >> + mclient->knows_txdone = false;
> > >> + mclient->tx_done = zynqmp_r5_mb_tx_done;
> > >> +
> > >> + /* Setup TX mailbox channel client */
> > >> + mclient = &pdata->rx_mc;
> > >> + mclient->dev = dev;
> > >> + mclient->rx_callback = zynqmp_r5_mb_rx_cb;
> > >> + mclient->tx_block = false;
> > >> + mclient->knows_txdone = false;
> > >> +
> > >> + INIT_WORK(&pdata->mbox_work, handle_event_notified);
> > >> +
> > >> + /* Request TX and RX channels */
> > >> + pdata->tx_chan = mbox_request_channel_byname(&pdata->tx_mc, "tx");
> > >> + if (IS_ERR(pdata->tx_chan)) {
> > >> + dev_err(dev, "failed to request mbox tx channel.\n");
> > >> + pdata->tx_chan = NULL;
> > >> + return -EINVAL;
> > >> + }
> > >> + pdata->rx_chan = mbox_request_channel_byname(&pdata->rx_mc, "rx");
> > >> + if (IS_ERR(pdata->rx_chan)) {
> > >> + dev_err(dev, "failed to request mbox rx channel.\n");
> > >> + pdata->rx_chan = NULL;
> > >> + return -EINVAL;
> > >> + }
> > >> + skb_queue_head_init(&pdata->tx_mc_skbs);
> > >> + return 0;
> > >> +}
> > >> +
> > >> +/**
> > >> + * zynqmp_r5_probe() - Probes ZynqMP R5 processor device node
> > >> + * @pdata: pointer to the ZynqMP R5 processor platform data
> > >> + * @pdev: parent RPU domain platform device
> > >> + * @node: pointer of the device node
> > >> + *
> > >> + * Function to retrieve the information of the ZynqMP R5 device node.
> > >> + *
> > >> + * Return: 0 for success, negative value for failure.
> > >> + */
> > >> +static int zynqmp_r5_probe(struct zynqmp_r5_pdata *pdata,
> > >> + struct platform_device *pdev,
> > >> + struct device_node *node)
> > >> +{
> > >> + struct device *dev = &pdata->dev;
> > >> + struct rproc *rproc;
> > >> + struct device_node *nc;
> > >> + int ret;
> > >> +
> > >> + /* Create device for ZynqMP R5 device */
> > >> + dev->parent = &pdev->dev;
> > >> + dev->release = zynqmp_r5_release;
> > >> + dev->of_node = node;
> > >> + dev_set_name(dev, "%s", of_node_full_name(node));
> > >> + dev_set_drvdata(dev, pdata);
> > >> + ret = device_register(dev);
> > >> + if (ret) {
> > >> + dev_err(dev, "failed to register device.\n");
> > >> + return ret;
> > >> + }
> > >> + get_device(&pdev->dev);
> > >> +
> > >> + /* Allocate remoteproc instance */
> > >> + rproc = rproc_alloc(dev, dev_name(dev), &zynqmp_r5_rproc_ops, NULL, 0);
> > >> + if (!rproc) {
> > >> + dev_err(dev, "rproc allocation failed.\n");
> > >> + ret = -ENOMEM;
> > >> + goto error;
> > >> + }
> > >> + rproc->auto_boot = autoboot;
> > >> + pdata->rproc = rproc;
> > >> + rproc->priv = pdata;
> > >> +
> > >> + /*
> > >> + * The device has not been spawned from a device tree, so
> > >> + * arch_setup_dma_ops has not been called, thus leaving
> > >> + * the device with dummy DMA ops.
> > >> + * Fix this by inheriting the parent's DMA ops and mask.
> > >> + */
> > >> + rproc->dev.dma_mask = pdev->dev.dma_mask;
> > >> + set_dma_ops(&rproc->dev, get_dma_ops(&pdev->dev));
> > >> +
> > >> + /* Probe R5 memory devices */
> > >> + INIT_LIST_HEAD(&pdata->mems);
> > >> + for_each_available_child_of_node(node, nc) {
> > >> + ret = zynqmp_r5_mem_probe(pdata, nc);
> > >> + if (ret) {
> > >> + dev_err(dev, "failed to probe memory %s.\n",
> > >> + of_node_full_name(nc));
> > >> + goto error;
> > >> + }
> > >> + }
> > >> +
> > >> + /* Set up DMA mask */
> > >> + ret = dma_set_coherent_mask(dev, DMA_BIT_MASK(32));
> > >> + if (ret) {
> > >> + dev_warn(dev, "dma_set_coherent_mask failed: %d\n", ret);
> > >> + /* If DMA is not configured yet, try to configure it. */
> > >> + ret = of_dma_configure(dev, node, true);
> > >> + if (ret) {
> > >> + dev_err(dev, "failed to configure DMA.\n");
> > >> + goto error;
> > >> + }
> > >> + }
> > >> +
> > >> + /* Get R5 power domain node */
> > >> + ret = of_property_read_u32(node, "pnode-id", &pdata->pnode_id);
> > >> + if (ret) {
> > >> + dev_err(dev, "failed to get power node id.\n");
> > >> + goto error;
> > >> + }
> > >> +
> > >> + /* Check if R5 is running */
> > >> + if (r5_is_running(pdata)) {
> > >> + atomic_inc(&rproc->power);
> > >> + rproc->state = RPROC_RUNNING;
> > >> + }
> > >
> > > How does this work when state_store() returns an error if rproc->state
> > > == RPROC_RUNNING? As such the remote processor is running but there
> > > is no way to attach to it. As I requested during my previous review,
> > > please hold off on supporting scenarios where the remote processor is
> > > already running when the driver is probe. We are working on introducing that in the remoteproc core.
> > [Ben Levinsky] Will do. Ok I will leave it as a FIXME for now
> > >
> > >> +
> > >> + if (!of_get_property(dev->of_node, "mboxes", NULL)) {
> > >> + dev_dbg(dev, "no mailboxes.\n");
> > >> + goto error;
> > >> + } else {
> > >> + ret = zynqmp_r5_setup_mbox(pdata, node);
> > >> + if (ret < 0)
> > >> + goto error;
> > >> + }
> > >> +
> > >> + /* Add R5 remoteproc */
> > >> + ret = rproc_add(rproc);
> > >> + if (ret) {
> > >> + dev_err(dev, "rproc registration failed\n");
> > >> + goto error;
> > >> + }
> > >> + return 0;
> > >> +error:
> > >> + if (pdata->rproc)
> > >> + rproc_free(pdata->rproc);
> > >> + pdata->rproc = NULL;
> > >> + device_unregister(dev);
> > >> + put_device(&pdev->dev);
> > >> + return ret;
> > >> +}
> > >> +
> > >> +static int zynqmp_r5_remoteproc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > >> +{
> > >> + const unsigned char *prop;
> > >> + int ret, i;
> > >> + struct device *dev = &pdev->dev;
> > >> + struct device_node *nc;
> > >> + struct zynqmp_r5_pdata *pdata;
> > >> +
> > >> + pdata = devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof(*pdata), GFP_KERNEL);
> > >> + if (!pdata)
> > >> + return -ENOMEM;
> > >> + platform_set_drvdata(pdev, pdata);
> > >> +
> > >> + prop = of_get_property(dev->of_node, "core_conf", NULL);
> > >> + if (!prop) {
> > >> + dev_err(&pdev->dev, "core_conf is not used.\n");
> > >> + return -EINVAL;
> > >> + }
> > >
> > > This should be the same as what Texas Instrument is doing, i.e:
> > > lockstep-mode = <1>
> > >
> > > That way:
> > >
> > > 1) The wheel is not re-invented.
> > > 2) An 'enum rpu_oper_mode' can be used directly.
> > > 3) No need for string comparison.
> >
> > So, for my next version, I am planning to change this "lockstep-mode" to a ti,cluster-mode property (still an enum/integer). We have a new SoC family coming up wherein we are supporting a unique mode called "Single CPU" mode which is not the same as LockStep, and I will be finding the current "lockstep-mode" property limiting there.
> >
> > [Ben Levinsky] will do, this will be in the revision.
>
> Thanks for the heads-up Suman. Ben, based on the above it is probably
> best to introduce a "qcomm,cluster-mode" property.
If 2 vendors already need the same thing, then that's a clue that we
should be dropping the vendor prefix. Though AIUI, lockstep is an R5
feature, so 'arm' would be the appropriate vendor.
The bigger issue is I don't think a single property is enough to
capture the differences between lockstep or not. But I'm not all that
familar with it.
Rob
Powered by blists - more mailing lists