[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <c7fd9642-7dcb-42bc-18e9-6fd86d8f5be8@codeaurora.org>
Date: Tue, 23 Feb 2021 16:38:38 -0700
From: Jeffrey Hugo <jhugo@...eaurora.org>
To: Stephen Boyd <swboyd@...omium.org>, Andy Gross <agross@...nel.org>,
Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
Elliot Berman <eberman@...eaurora.org>,
Brian Masney <masneyb@...tation.org>,
Stephan Gerhold <stephan@...hold.net>,
Douglas Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/6] firmware: qcom_scm: Workaround lack of "is available"
call on SC7180
On 2/23/2021 2:45 PM, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> Some SC7180 firmwares don't implement the QCOM_SCM_INFO_IS_CALL_AVAIL
> API, so we can't probe the calling convention. We detect the legacy
> calling convention on these firmwares, because the availability call
> always fails and legacy is the fallback. This leads to problems where
> the rmtfs driver fails to probe, because it tries to assign memory with
> a bad calling convention, which then leads to modem failing to load and
> all networking, even wifi, to fail. Ouch!
>
> Let's force the calling convention to be what it always is on this SoC,
> i.e. arm64. Of course, the calling convention is not the same thing as
> implementing the QCOM_SCM_INFO_IS_CALL_AVAIL API. The absence of the "is
> this call available" API from the firmware means that any call to
> __qcom_scm_is_call_available() fails. This is OK for now though because
> none of the calls that are checked for existence are implemented on
> firmware running on sc7180. If such a call needs to be checked for
> existence in the future, we presume that firmware will implement this
> API and then things will "just work".
>
> Cc: Elliot Berman <eberman@...eaurora.org>
> Cc: Brian Masney <masneyb@...tation.org>
> Cc: Stephan Gerhold <stephan@...hold.net>
> Cc: Jeffrey Hugo <jhugo@...eaurora.org>
> Cc: Douglas Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>
> Fixes: 9a434cee773a ("firmware: qcom_scm: Dynamically support SMCCC and legacy conventions")
> Signed-off-by: Stephen Boyd <swboyd@...omium.org>
> ---
> drivers/firmware/qcom_scm.c | 18 ++++++++++++++++--
> 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/qcom_scm.c b/drivers/firmware/qcom_scm.c
> index 21e07a464bd9..9ac84b5d6ce0 100644
> --- a/drivers/firmware/qcom_scm.c
> +++ b/drivers/firmware/qcom_scm.c
> @@ -131,6 +131,7 @@ static enum qcom_scm_convention __get_convention(void)
> struct qcom_scm_res res;
> enum qcom_scm_convention probed_convention;
> int ret;
> + bool forced = false;
>
> if (likely(qcom_scm_convention != SMC_CONVENTION_UNKNOWN))
> return qcom_scm_convention;
> @@ -144,6 +145,18 @@ static enum qcom_scm_convention __get_convention(void)
> if (!ret && res.result[0] == 1)
> goto found;
>
> + /*
> + * Some SC7180 firmwares didn't implement the
> + * QCOM_SCM_INFO_IS_CALL_AVAIL call, so we fallback to forcing ARM_64
> + * calling conventions on these firmwares. Luckily we don't make any
> + * early calls into the firmware on these SoCs so the device pointer
> + * will be valid here to check if the compatible matches.
> + */
> + if (of_device_is_compatible(__scm ? __scm->dev->of_node : NULL, "qcom,scm-sc7180")) {
> + forced = true;
> + goto found;
> + }
All SC7180 targets run DT? None have ACPI?
--
Jeffrey Hugo
Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. is a member of the
Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists