| 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: <e744b564-e5d2-48d3-91fb-8178344baf85@amd.com> Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2024 13:28:10 -0500 From: Tanmay Shah <tanmay.shah@....com> To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>, andersson@...nel.org, mathieu.poirier@...aro.org, robh+dt@...nel.org, krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org, conor+dt@...nel.org, michal.simek@....com, ben.levinsky@....com Cc: linux-remoteproc@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] dt-bindings: remoteproc: add Versal-NET platform On 3/22/24 12:44 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 21/03/2024 16:13, Tanmay Shah wrote: >> >> >> On 3/21/24 2:39 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >>> On 20/03/2024 16:14, Tanmay Shah wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> On 3/20/24 2:40 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >>>>> On 19/03/2024 15:42, Tanmay Shah wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On 3/19/24 12:30 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >>>>>>> On 19/03/2024 01:51, Tanmay Shah wrote: >>>>>>>> Hello Krzysztof, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Thanks for reviews. Please find my comments below. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 3/17/24 1:53 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >>>>>>>>> On 15/03/2024 22:15, Tanmay Shah wrote: >>>>>>>>>> AMD-Xilinx Versal-NET platform is successor of Versal platform. It >>>>>>>>>> contains multiple clusters of cortex-R52 real-time processing units. >>>>>>>>>> Each cluster contains two cores of cortex-R52 processors. Each cluster >>>>>>>>>> can be configured in lockstep mode or split mode. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Each R52 core is assigned 128KB of TCM memory. ATCM memory is 64KB, BTCM >>>>>>>>>> and CTCM memoreis are 32KB each. Each TCM memory has its own dedicated >>>>>>>>>> power-domain that needs to be requested before using it. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Tanmay Shah <tanmay.shah@....com> >>>>>>>>>> --- >>>>>>>>>> .../remoteproc/xlnx,zynqmp-r5fss.yaml | 220 +++++++++++++++--- >>>>>>>>>> 1 file changed, 184 insertions(+), 36 deletions(-) >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/xlnx,zynqmp-r5fss.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/xlnx,zynqmp-r5fss.yaml >>>>>>>>>> index 711da0272250..55654ee02eef 100644 >>>>>>>>>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/xlnx,zynqmp-r5fss.yaml >>>>>>>>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/xlnx,zynqmp-r5fss.yaml >>>>>>>>>> @@ -18,7 +18,9 @@ description: | >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> properties: >>>>>>>>>> compatible: >>>>>>>>>> - const: xlnx,zynqmp-r5fss >>>>>>>>>> + enum: >>>>>>>>>> + - xlnx,zynqmp-r5fss >>>>>>>>>> + - xlnx,versal-net-r52fss >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> "#address-cells": >>>>>>>>>> const: 2 >>>>>>>>>> @@ -64,7 +66,9 @@ patternProperties: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> properties: >>>>>>>>>> compatible: >>>>>>>>>> - const: xlnx,zynqmp-r5f >>>>>>>>>> + enum: >>>>>>>>>> + - xlnx,zynqmp-r5f >>>>>>>>>> + - xlnx,versal-net-r52f >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> reg: >>>>>>>>>> minItems: 1 >>>>>>>>>> @@ -135,9 +139,11 @@ required: >>>>>>>>>> allOf: >>>>>>>>>> - if: >>>>>>>>>> properties: >>>>>>>>>> - xlnx,cluster-mode: >>>>>>>>>> - enum: >>>>>>>>>> - - 1 >>>>>>>>>> + compatible: >>>>>>>>>> + contains: >>>>>>>>>> + enum: >>>>>>>>>> + - xlnx,versal-net-r52fss >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Why do you touch these lines? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> + >>>>>>>>>> then: >>>>>>>>>> patternProperties: >>>>>>>>>> "^r5f@[0-9a-f]+$": >>>>>>>>>> @@ -149,16 +155,14 @@ allOf: >>>>>>>>>> items: >>>>>>>>>> - description: ATCM internal memory >>>>>>>>>> - description: BTCM internal memory >>>>>>>>>> - - description: extra ATCM memory in lockstep mode >>>>>>>>>> - - description: extra BTCM memory in lockstep mode >>>>>>>>>> + - description: CTCM internal memory >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> reg-names: >>>>>>>>>> minItems: 1 >>>>>>>>>> items: >>>>>>>>>> - - const: atcm0 >>>>>>>>>> - - const: btcm0 >>>>>>>>>> - - const: atcm1 >>>>>>>>>> - - const: btcm1 >>>>>>>>>> + - const: atcm >>>>>>>>>> + - const: btcm >>>>>>>>>> + - const: ctcm >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> power-domains: >>>>>>>>>> minItems: 2 >>>>>>>>>> @@ -166,33 +170,70 @@ allOf: >>>>>>>>>> - description: RPU core power domain >>>>>>>>>> - description: ATCM power domain >>>>>>>>>> - description: BTCM power domain >>>>>>>>>> - - description: second ATCM power domain >>>>>>>>>> - - description: second BTCM power domain >>>>>>>>>> + - description: CTCM power domain >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> else: >>>>>>>>>> - patternProperties: >>>>>>>>>> - "^r5f@[0-9a-f]+$": >>>>>>>>>> - type: object >>>>>>>>>> - >>>>>>>>>> - properties: >>>>>>>>>> - reg: >>>>>>>>>> - minItems: 1 >>>>>>>>>> - items: >>>>>>>>>> - - description: ATCM internal memory >>>>>>>>>> - - description: BTCM internal memory >>>>>>>>>> - >>>>>>>>>> - reg-names: >>>>>>>>>> - minItems: 1 >>>>>>>>>> - items: >>>>>>>>>> - - const: atcm0 >>>>>>>>>> - - const: btcm0 >>>>>>>>>> - >>>>>>>>>> - power-domains: >>>>>>>>>> - minItems: 2 >>>>>>>>>> - items: >>>>>>>>>> - - description: RPU core power domain >>>>>>>>>> - - description: ATCM power domain >>>>>>>>>> - - description: BTCM power domain >>>>>>>>>> + allOf: >>>>>>>>>> + - if: >>>>>>>>>> + properties: >>>>>>>>>> + xlnx,cluster-mode: >>>>>>>>>> + enum: >>>>>>>>>> + - 1 >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Whatever you did here, is not really readable. You have now multiple >>>>>>>>> if:then:if:then embedded. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> For ZynqMP platform, TCM can be configured differently in lockstep mode >>>>>>>> and split mode. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> For Versal-NET no such configuration is available, but new CTCM memory >>>>>>>> is added. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> So, I am trying to achieve following representation of TCM for both: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> if: versal-net compatible >>>>>>>> then: >>>>>>>> ATCM - 64KB >>>>>>>> BTCM - 32KB >>>>>>>> CTCM - 32KB >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> else: (ZynqMP compatible) >>>>>>>> if: >>>>>>>> xlnx,cluster-mode (lockstep mode) >>>>>>>> then: >>>>>>>> ATCM0 - 64KB >>>>>>>> BTCM0 - 64KB >>>>>>>> ATCM1 - 64KB >>>>>>>> BTCM1 - 64KB >>>>>>>> else: (split mode) >>>>>>>> ATCM0 - 64KB >>>>>>>> BTCM0 - 64KB >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> If bindings are getting complicated, does it make sense to introduce >>>>>>>> new file for Versal-NET bindings? Let me know how you would like me >>>>>>>> to proceed. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> All this is broken in your previous patchset, but now we nicely see. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> No, this does not work like this. You do not have entirely different >>>>>>> programming models in one device, don't you? >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> I don't understand what do you mean? Programming model is same. Only number >>>>>> of TCMs are changing based on configuration and platform. I can certainly >>>>>> list different compatible for different platforms as requested. But other than >>>>>> that not sure what needs to be fixed. >>>>> >>>>> You cannot have same programming model with different memory mappings. >>>>> Anyway, please follow writing bindings rules: all of your different >>>>> devices must have dedicated compatible. I really though we talked about >>>>> two IPs on same SoC... >>>> >>>> I agree that Versal compatible should be added, I will do that in next revision. >>>> >>>> For ZynqMP case, it is two IPs on same SOC. In lockstep mode and split mode, >>>> same SOC is configuring TCM differently. >>>> >>>> How this should be resolved for Versal-NET ? Driver avoids such TCM configuration >>>> for Versal-NET. >>> >>> Binding should describe the hardware, not what driver is doing >>> currently, so the question is: does your device have such properties or >>> not? Anyway, you need compatible per each variant and each SoC >>> implementation. >> >> Thanks for reviews. >> >> Okay in that case I believe I should add one more property to current bindings for TCM >> configuration. >> > > I am not sure if you understand how IRC works... You sent me message on > IRC about this topic and shortly after you quit. So how am I supposed to > send reply? IRC does not work like that... > Yeah, I am referring related documentation on IRC. >> From our discussion I conclude to following next steps: >> >> 1) I will send Versal and Versal-NET support as part of previous series (v14) so we get >> bigger picture in the first place. >> >> 2) Add separate compatible for versal platform. >> Use device compatible string to maintain >> backward compatibility and not machine (root node) compatible string. >> >> 3) Add tcm,mode property in bindings and each device must configure TCM based on that >> property only and not based on compatible string. >> >> 4) Versal-NET will disallow tcm,mode property in bindings as no such configuration is >> possible for that platform. > > I really don't know your SoCs. What about Zynq? You keep using here > names all over the place, but I am not Xilinx maintainer. > Zynq doesn't have Cortex-R IP so this driver isn't needed on that. > > Best regards, > Krzysztof >
Powered by blists - more mailing lists