linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 3/3] remoteproc: zynqmp: get TCM from device-tree

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 5 Sep 2023 16:48:54 -0500
From:   Tanmay Shah <tanmay.shah@....com>
To:     Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <philmd@...aro.org>,
        linux-remoteproc@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>,
        Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@...aro.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
        Michal Simek <michal.simek@....com>
Cc:     Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
        Radhey Shyam Pandey <radhey.shyam.pandey@....com>,
        Ben Levinsky <ben.levinsky@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 3/3] remoteproc: zynqmp: get TCM from device-tree


On 9/4/23 2:50 AM, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 29/8/23 20:19, Tanmay Shah wrote:
> > Use new dt bindings to get TCM address and size
> > information. Also make sure that driver stays
> > compatible with previous device-tree bindings.
> > So, if TCM information isn't available in device-tree
> > for zynqmp platform, hard-coded address of TCM will
> > be used.
> > 
> > New platforms that are compatible with this
> > driver must add TCM support in device-tree as per new
> > bindings.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Tanmay Shah <tanmay.shah@....com>
> > ---
> >   drivers/remoteproc/xlnx_r5_remoteproc.c | 279 +++++++++++++++++++-----
> >   1 file changed, 221 insertions(+), 58 deletions(-)
>
>
> >   /**
> > @@ -75,11 +79,17 @@ struct mbox_info {
> >    * Hardcoded TCM bank values. This will be removed once TCM bindings are
> >    * accepted for system-dt specifications and upstreamed in linux kernel
>
> Just curious, for how long this fall back code has to be maintained?
> (When/how will we know we can remove it?)


I believe we should never remove it. It's important that driver works with old bindings as well.


>
> >    */
> > -static const struct mem_bank_data zynqmp_tcm_banks[] = {
> > -	{0xffe00000UL, 0x10000UL, PD_R5_0_ATCM, "atcm0"}, /* TCM 64KB each */
> > -	{0xffe20000UL, 0x10000UL, PD_R5_0_BTCM, "btcm0"},
> > -	{0xffe90000UL, 0x10000UL, PD_R5_1_ATCM, "atcm1"},
> > -	{0xffeb0000UL, 0x10000UL, PD_R5_1_BTCM, "btcm1"},
> > +static const struct mem_bank_data zynqmp_tcm_banks_split[] = {
> > +	{0xffe00000, 0x0, 0x10000, PD_R5_0_ATCM, 0, "atcm0"}, /* TCM 64KB each */
> > +	{0xffe20000, 0x20000, 0x10000, PD_R5_0_BTCM, 0, "btcm0"},
> > +	{0xffe90000, 0x0, 0x10000, PD_R5_1_ATCM, 0, "atcm1"},
> > +	{0xffeb0000, 0x20000, 0x10000, PD_R5_1_BTCM, 0, "btcm1"},
> > +};
>