[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200622173540.GA1820962@xps15>
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2020 11:35:40 -0600
From: Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@...aro.org>
To: Suman Anna <s-anna@...com>
Cc: Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Lokesh Vutla <lokeshvutla@...com>,
Grzegorz Jaszczyk <grzegorz.jaszczyk@...aro.org>,
linux-remoteproc@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/6] remoteproc: k3: Add TI-SCI processor control
helper functions
Hi Suman,
Apologies for the late reply, this one slipped through the cracks...
On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 05:49:10PM -0500, Suman Anna wrote:
> Texas Instruments' K3 generation SoCs have specific modules/register
> spaces used for configuring the various aspects of a remote processor.
> These include power, reset, boot vector and other configuration features
> specific to each compute processor present on the SoC. These registers
> are managed by the System Controller such as DMSC on K3 AM65x SoCs.
>
> The Texas Instrument's System Control Interface (TI-SCI) Message Protocol
> is used to communicate to the System Controller from various compute
> processors to invoke specific services provided by the firmware running
> on the System Controller.
>
> Add a common processor control interface header file that can be used by
> multiple remoteproc drivers. The helper functions within this header file
> abstract the various TI SCI protocol ops for the remoteproc drivers, and
> allow them to request the System Controller to be able to program and
> manage various remote processors on the SoC. The remoteproc drivers are
> expected to manage the life-cycle of their ti_sci_proc_dev local
> structures.
>
> Signed-off-by: Suman Anna <s-anna@...com>
> ---
> v3: New to this series, but the patch is identical to the one from the
> K3 R5F series posted previously, with patch title adjusted
> https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11456379/
>
> drivers/remoteproc/ti_sci_proc.h | 102 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 102 insertions(+)
> create mode 100644 drivers/remoteproc/ti_sci_proc.h
>
> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/ti_sci_proc.h b/drivers/remoteproc/ti_sci_proc.h
> new file mode 100644
> index 000000000000..e42d8015b8e7
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/ti_sci_proc.h
> @@ -0,0 +1,102 @@
> +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only */
> +/*
> + * Texas Instruments TI-SCI Processor Controller Helper Functions
> + *
> + * Copyright (C) 2018-2020 Texas Instruments Incorporated - http://www.ti.com/
> + * Suman Anna
> + */
> +
> +#ifndef REMOTEPROC_TI_SCI_PROC_H
> +#define REMOTEPROC_TI_SCI_PROC_H
> +
> +/**
> + * struct ti_sci_proc - structure representing a processor control client
> + * @sci: cached TI-SCI protocol handle
> + * @ops: cached TI-SCI proc ops
> + * @dev: cached client device pointer
> + * @proc_id: processor id for the consumer remoteproc device
> + * @host_id: host id to pass the control over for this consumer remoteproc
> + * device
> + */
> +struct ti_sci_proc {
> + const struct ti_sci_handle *sci;
> + const struct ti_sci_proc_ops *ops;
> + struct device *dev;
Please include the proper header files for the above structures. I would also
have expected the name of the structure to be ti_sci_rproc but that choice is
entirely your.
With the proper header files included:
Reviewed-by: Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@...aro.org>
> + u8 proc_id;
> + u8 host_id;
> +};
> +
> +static inline int ti_sci_proc_request(struct ti_sci_proc *tsp)
> +{
> + int ret;
> +
> + ret = tsp->ops->request(tsp->sci, tsp->proc_id);
> + if (ret)
> + dev_err(tsp->dev, "ti-sci processor request failed: %d\n",
> + ret);
> + return ret;
> +}
> +
> +static inline int ti_sci_proc_release(struct ti_sci_proc *tsp)
> +{
> + int ret;
> +
> + ret = tsp->ops->release(tsp->sci, tsp->proc_id);
> + if (ret)
> + dev_err(tsp->dev, "ti-sci processor release failed: %d\n",
> + ret);
> + return ret;
> +}
> +
> +static inline int ti_sci_proc_handover(struct ti_sci_proc *tsp)
> +{
> + int ret;
> +
> + ret = tsp->ops->handover(tsp->sci, tsp->proc_id, tsp->host_id);
> + if (ret)
> + dev_err(tsp->dev, "ti-sci processor handover of %d to %d failed: %d\n",
> + tsp->proc_id, tsp->host_id, ret);
> + return ret;
> +}
> +
> +static inline int ti_sci_proc_set_config(struct ti_sci_proc *tsp,
> + u64 boot_vector,
> + u32 cfg_set, u32 cfg_clr)
> +{
> + int ret;
> +
> + ret = tsp->ops->set_config(tsp->sci, tsp->proc_id, boot_vector,
> + cfg_set, cfg_clr);
> + if (ret)
> + dev_err(tsp->dev, "ti-sci processor set_config failed: %d\n",
> + ret);
> + return ret;
> +}
> +
> +static inline int ti_sci_proc_set_control(struct ti_sci_proc *tsp,
> + u32 ctrl_set, u32 ctrl_clr)
> +{
> + int ret;
> +
> + ret = tsp->ops->set_control(tsp->sci, tsp->proc_id, ctrl_set, ctrl_clr);
> + if (ret)
> + dev_err(tsp->dev, "ti-sci processor set_control failed: %d\n",
> + ret);
> + return ret;
> +}
> +
> +static inline int ti_sci_proc_get_status(struct ti_sci_proc *tsp,
> + u64 *boot_vector, u32 *cfg_flags,
> + u32 *ctrl_flags, u32 *status_flags)
> +{
> + int ret;
> +
> + ret = tsp->ops->get_status(tsp->sci, tsp->proc_id, boot_vector,
> + cfg_flags, ctrl_flags, status_flags);
> + if (ret)
> + dev_err(tsp->dev, "ti-sci processor get_status failed: %d\n",
> + ret);
> + return ret;
> +}
> +
> +#endif /* REMOTEPROC_TI_SCI_PROC_H */
> --
> 2.26.0
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists