| 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: <20240423160644.GA554932@dev-arch.thelio-3990X>
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2024 09:06:44 -0700
From: Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>
To: Tanmay Shah <tanmay.shah@....com>
Cc: andersson@...nel.org, mathieu.poirier@...aro.org,
linux-remoteproc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
llvm@...ts.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drivers: remoteproc: xlnx: Add Versal and Versal-NET
support
Hi Tanmay,
On Thu, Apr 18, 2024 at 03:01:25PM -0700, Tanmay Shah wrote:
> AMD-Xilinx Versal platform is successor of ZynqMP platform.
> Real-time Processing Unit R5 cluster IP on Versal is same as
> of ZynqMP Platform. Power-domains ids for Versal platform is
> different than ZynqMP.
>
> AMD-Xilinx Versal-NET platform is successor of Versal platform.
> Versal-NET Real-Time Processing Unit has two clusters and each
> cluster contains dual core ARM Cortex-R52 processors. Each R52
> core is assigned 128KB of TCM memory.
>
> Signed-off-by: Tanmay Shah <tanmay.shah@....com>
> ---
> drivers/remoteproc/xlnx_r5_remoteproc.c | 53 ++++++++-----------------
> 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 36 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/xlnx_r5_remoteproc.c b/drivers/remoteproc/xlnx_r5_remoteproc.c
> index 7b1c12108bff..a6d8ac7394e7 100644
> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/xlnx_r5_remoteproc.c
> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/xlnx_r5_remoteproc.c
> @@ -300,36 +300,6 @@ static void zynqmp_r5_rproc_kick(struct rproc *rproc, int vqid)
> dev_warn(dev, "failed to send message\n");
> }
>
> -/*
> - * zynqmp_r5_set_mode()
> - *
> - * set RPU cluster and TCM operation mode
> - *
> - * @r5_core: pointer to zynqmp_r5_core type object
> - * @fw_reg_val: value expected by firmware to configure RPU cluster mode
> - * @tcm_mode: value expected by fw to configure TCM mode (lockstep or split)
> - *
> - * Return: 0 for success and < 0 for failure
> - */
> -static int zynqmp_r5_set_mode(struct zynqmp_r5_core *r5_core,
> - enum rpu_oper_mode fw_reg_val,
> - enum rpu_tcm_comb tcm_mode)
> -{
> - int ret;
> -
> - ret = zynqmp_pm_set_rpu_mode(r5_core->pm_domain_id, fw_reg_val);
> - if (ret < 0) {
> - dev_err(r5_core->dev, "failed to set RPU mode\n");
> - return ret;
> - }
> -
> - ret = zynqmp_pm_set_tcm_config(r5_core->pm_domain_id, tcm_mode);
> - if (ret < 0)
> - dev_err(r5_core->dev, "failed to configure TCM\n");
> -
> - return ret;
> -}
> -
> /*
> * zynqmp_r5_rproc_start()
> * @rproc: single R5 core's corresponding rproc instance
> @@ -941,7 +911,7 @@ static int zynqmp_r5_core_init(struct zynqmp_r5_cluster *cluster,
> /* Maintain backward compatibility for zynqmp by using hardcode TCM address. */
> if (of_find_property(r5_core->np, "reg", NULL))
> ret = zynqmp_r5_get_tcm_node_from_dt(cluster);
> - else
> + else if (device_is_compatible(dev, "xlnx,zynqmp-r5fss"))
> ret = zynqmp_r5_get_tcm_node(cluster);
This change breaks the build with clang:
drivers/remoteproc/xlnx_r5_remoteproc.c:914:11: error: variable 'ret' is used uninitialized whenever 'if' condition is false [-Werror,-Wsometimes-uninitialized]
914 | else if (device_is_compatible(dev, "xlnx,zynqmp-r5fss"))
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
drivers/remoteproc/xlnx_r5_remoteproc.c:917:6: note: uninitialized use occurs here
917 | if (ret) {
| ^~~
drivers/remoteproc/xlnx_r5_remoteproc.c:914:7: note: remove the 'if' if its condition is always true
914 | else if (device_is_compatible(dev, "xlnx,zynqmp-r5fss"))
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
915 | ret = zynqmp_r5_get_tcm_node(cluster);
drivers/remoteproc/xlnx_r5_remoteproc.c:907:9: note: initialize the variable 'ret' to silence this warning
907 | int ret, i;
| ^
| = 0
1 error generated.
Should ret be initialized to zero or should there be an else statement?
Cheers,
Nathan
>
> if (ret) {
> @@ -960,12 +930,21 @@ static int zynqmp_r5_core_init(struct zynqmp_r5_cluster *cluster,
> return ret;
> }
>
> - ret = zynqmp_r5_set_mode(r5_core, fw_reg_val, tcm_mode);
> - if (ret) {
> - dev_err(dev, "failed to set r5 cluster mode %d, err %d\n",
> - cluster->mode, ret);
> + ret = zynqmp_pm_set_rpu_mode(r5_core->pm_domain_id, fw_reg_val);
> + if (ret < 0) {
> + dev_err(r5_core->dev, "failed to set RPU mode\n");
> return ret;
> }
> +
> + if (of_find_property(dev_of_node(dev), "xlnx,tcm-mode", NULL) ||
> + device_is_compatible(dev, "xlnx,zynqmp-r5fss")) {
> + ret = zynqmp_pm_set_tcm_config(r5_core->pm_domain_id,
> + tcm_mode);
> + if (ret < 0) {
> + dev_err(r5_core->dev, "failed to configure TCM\n");
> + return ret;
> + }
> + }
> }
>
> return 0;
> @@ -1022,7 +1001,7 @@ static int zynqmp_r5_cluster_init(struct zynqmp_r5_cluster *cluster)
> ret = of_property_read_u32(dev_node, "xlnx,tcm-mode", (u32 *)&tcm_mode);
> if (ret)
> return ret;
> - } else {
> + } else if (device_is_compatible(dev, "xlnx,zynqmp-r5fss")) {
> if (cluster_mode == LOCKSTEP_MODE)
> tcm_mode = PM_RPU_TCM_COMB;
> else
> @@ -1212,6 +1191,8 @@ static int zynqmp_r5_remoteproc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>
> /* Match table for OF platform binding */
> static const struct of_device_id zynqmp_r5_remoteproc_match[] = {
> + { .compatible = "xlnx,versal-net-r52fss", },
> + { .compatible = "xlnx,versal-r5fss", },
> { .compatible = "xlnx,zynqmp-r5fss", },
> { /* end of list */ },
> };
>
> base-commit: 912ebe48bec5927e2049e91b0e8a9cc682a709d2
> --
> 2.25.1
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists