| 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: <20230116164527.GB3239767@p14s>
Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2023 09:45:27 -0700
From: Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@...aro.org>
To: Devarsh Thakkar <devarsht@...com>
Cc: andersson@...nel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
p.zabel@...gutronix.de, linux-remoteproc@...r.kernel.org,
robh+dt@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org, s-anna@...com, hnagalla@...com,
praneeth@...com, nm@...com, vigneshr@...com, a-bhatia1@...com,
j-luthra@...com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 3/3] remoteproc: k3-r5: Use separate compatible string
for TI AM62x SoC family
On Mon, Jan 16, 2023 at 08:49:06PM +0530, Devarsh Thakkar wrote:
> AM62 and AM62A SoCs use single core R5F which is a new scenario
> different than the one being used with CLUSTER_MODE_SINGLECPU
> which is for utilizing a single core from a set of cores available
> in R5F cluster present in the SoC.
>
> To support this single core scenario map it with
> newly defined CLUSTER_MODE_SINGLECORE and use it when
> compatible is set to ti,am62-r5fss.
>
> Also set PROC_BOOT_CFG_FLAG_R5_SINGLE_CORE config for
> CLUSTER_MODE_SINGLECORE too as it is required by R5 core when it
> is being as general purpose core instead of device manager.
>
> Signed-off-by: Devarsh Thakkar <devarsht@...com>
> ---
> V2:
> - Fix indentation and ordering issues as per review comments
> V3:
> - Change CLUSTER_MODE_NONE value to -1
> V4:
> - No change
> V5:
> - No change (fixing typo in email address)
> V6:
> - Use CLUSTER_MODE_SINGLECORE for AM62x
> - Set PROC_BOOT_CFG_FLAG_R5_SINGLE_CORE for single core.
> ---
> drivers/remoteproc/ti_k3_r5_remoteproc.c | 62 +++++++++++++++++++-----
> 1 file changed, 49 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/ti_k3_r5_remoteproc.c b/drivers/remoteproc/ti_k3_r5_remoteproc.c
> index 036c9dc217f3..089215144e6b 100644
> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/ti_k3_r5_remoteproc.c
> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/ti_k3_r5_remoteproc.c
> @@ -71,14 +71,16 @@ struct k3_r5_mem {
> /*
> * All cluster mode values are not applicable on all SoCs. The following
> * are the modes supported on various SoCs:
> - * Split mode : AM65x, J721E, J7200 and AM64x SoCs
> - * LockStep mode : AM65x, J721E and J7200 SoCs
> - * Single-CPU mode : AM64x SoCs only
> + * Split mode : AM65x, J721E, J7200 and AM64x SoCs
> + * LockStep mode : AM65x, J721E and J7200 SoCs
> + * Single-CPU mode : AM64x SoCs only
> + * Single-Core mode : AM62x, AM62A SoCs
> */
> enum cluster_mode {
> CLUSTER_MODE_SPLIT = 0,
> CLUSTER_MODE_LOCKSTEP,
> CLUSTER_MODE_SINGLECPU,
> + CLUSTER_MODE_SINGLECORE
> };
>
> /**
> @@ -86,11 +88,13 @@ enum cluster_mode {
> * @tcm_is_double: flag to denote the larger unified TCMs in certain modes
> * @tcm_ecc_autoinit: flag to denote the auto-initialization of TCMs for ECC
> * @single_cpu_mode: flag to denote if SoC/IP supports Single-CPU mode
> + * @is_single_core: flag to denote if SoC/IP has only single core R5
> */
> struct k3_r5_soc_data {
> bool tcm_is_double;
> bool tcm_ecc_autoinit;
> bool single_cpu_mode;
> + bool is_single_core;
> };
>
> /**
> @@ -838,7 +842,8 @@ static int k3_r5_rproc_configure(struct k3_r5_rproc *kproc)
>
> core0 = list_first_entry(&cluster->cores, struct k3_r5_core, elem);
> if (cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_LOCKSTEP ||
> - cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_SINGLECPU) {
> + cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_SINGLECPU ||
> + cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_SINGLECORE) {
> core = core0;
> } else {
> core = kproc->core;
> @@ -881,7 +886,8 @@ static int k3_r5_rproc_configure(struct k3_r5_rproc *kproc)
> * with the bit configured, so program it only on
> * permitted cores
> */
> - if (cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_SINGLECPU) {
> + if (cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_SINGLECPU ||
> + cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_SINGLECORE) {
> set_cfg = PROC_BOOT_CFG_FLAG_R5_SINGLE_CORE;
Why was this not part of the 5 previous version?
> } else {
> /*
> @@ -1073,6 +1079,7 @@ static void k3_r5_adjust_tcm_sizes(struct k3_r5_rproc *kproc)
>
> if (cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_LOCKSTEP ||
> cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_SINGLECPU ||
> + cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_SINGLECORE ||
> !cluster->soc_data->tcm_is_double)
> return;
>
> @@ -1146,7 +1153,9 @@ static int k3_r5_rproc_configure_mode(struct k3_r5_rproc *kproc)
> atcm_enable = cfg & PROC_BOOT_CFG_FLAG_R5_ATCM_EN ? 1 : 0;
> btcm_enable = cfg & PROC_BOOT_CFG_FLAG_R5_BTCM_EN ? 1 : 0;
> loczrama = cfg & PROC_BOOT_CFG_FLAG_R5_TCM_RSTBASE ? 1 : 0;
> - if (cluster->soc_data->single_cpu_mode) {
> + if (cluster->soc_data->is_single_core) {
> + mode = CLUSTER_MODE_SINGLECORE;
> + } else if (cluster->soc_data->single_cpu_mode) {
I have already commented on that.
> mode = cfg & PROC_BOOT_CFG_FLAG_R5_SINGLE_CORE ?
> CLUSTER_MODE_SINGLECPU : CLUSTER_MODE_SPLIT;
> } else {
> @@ -1268,9 +1277,12 @@ static int k3_r5_cluster_rproc_init(struct platform_device *pdev)
> goto err_add;
> }
>
> - /* create only one rproc in lockstep mode or single-cpu mode */
> + /* create only one rproc in lockstep, single-cpu or
> + * single core mode
> + */
> if (cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_LOCKSTEP ||
> - cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_SINGLECPU)
> + cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_SINGLECPU ||
> + cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_SINGLECORE)
> break;
> }
>
> @@ -1699,12 +1711,19 @@ static int k3_r5_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> return -ENOMEM;
>
> cluster->dev = dev;
> +
> /*
> - * default to most common efuse configurations - Split-mode on AM64x
> - * and LockStep-mode on all others
> + * default to most common efuse configurations -
> + * Split-mode on AM64x
> + * Single core on AM62x
> + * LockStep-mode on all others
> */
> - cluster->mode = data->single_cpu_mode ?
> + if (!data->is_single_core)
> + cluster->mode = data->single_cpu_mode ?
> CLUSTER_MODE_SPLIT : CLUSTER_MODE_LOCKSTEP;
> + else
> + cluster->mode = CLUSTER_MODE_SINGLECORE;
> +
> cluster->soc_data = data;
> INIT_LIST_HEAD(&cluster->cores);
>
> @@ -1716,8 +1735,14 @@ static int k3_r5_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> }
>
> num_cores = of_get_available_child_count(np);
> - if (num_cores != 2) {
> - dev_err(dev, "MCU cluster requires both R5F cores to be enabled, num_cores = %d\n",
> + if (num_cores != 2 && !data->is_single_core) {
> + dev_err(dev, "MCU cluster requires both R5F cores to be enabled but num_cores is set to = %d\n",
> + num_cores);
> + return -ENODEV;
> + }
> +
> + if (num_cores != 1 && data->is_single_core) {
> + dev_err(dev, "SoC supports only single core R5 but num_cores is set to %d\n",
> num_cores);
> return -ENODEV;
> }
> @@ -1759,18 +1784,28 @@ static const struct k3_r5_soc_data am65_j721e_soc_data = {
> .tcm_is_double = false,
> .tcm_ecc_autoinit = false,
> .single_cpu_mode = false,
> + .is_single_core = false,
> };
>
> static const struct k3_r5_soc_data j7200_j721s2_soc_data = {
> .tcm_is_double = true,
> .tcm_ecc_autoinit = true,
> .single_cpu_mode = false,
> + .is_single_core = false,
> };
>
> static const struct k3_r5_soc_data am64_soc_data = {
> .tcm_is_double = true,
> .tcm_ecc_autoinit = true,
> .single_cpu_mode = true,
> + .is_single_core = false,
> +};
> +
> +static const struct k3_r5_soc_data am62_soc_data = {
> + .tcm_is_double = false,
> + .tcm_ecc_autoinit = true,
> + .single_cpu_mode = false,
> + .is_single_core = true,
> };
>
> static const struct of_device_id k3_r5_of_match[] = {
> @@ -1778,6 +1813,7 @@ static const struct of_device_id k3_r5_of_match[] = {
> { .compatible = "ti,j721e-r5fss", .data = &am65_j721e_soc_data, },
> { .compatible = "ti,j7200-r5fss", .data = &j7200_j721s2_soc_data, },
> { .compatible = "ti,am64-r5fss", .data = &am64_soc_data, },
> + { .compatible = "ti,am62-r5fss", .data = &am62_soc_data, },
> { .compatible = "ti,j721s2-r5fss", .data = &j7200_j721s2_soc_data, },
> { /* sentinel */ },
> };
> --
> 2.34.1
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists