| 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: <CAKrir7iHjxnRvZvch8ADgGFymm_z1=rU8gOM+Q==xpe64G6xkA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2024 15:44:54 +0200
From: Ian Dannapel <iansdannapel@...il.com>
To: Xu Yilun <yilun.xu@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: Moritz Fischer <mdf@...nel.org>, Wu Hao <hao.wu@...el.com>, Xu Yilun <yilun.xu@...el.com>,
Tom Rix <trix@...hat.com>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>, Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
Heiko Stuebner <heiko.stuebner@...rry.de>, Neil Armstrong <neil.armstrong@...aro.org>,
Sebastian Reichel <sre@...nel.org>, Chris Morgan <macromorgan@...mail.com>,
Michael Riesch <michael.riesch@...fvision.net>, Rafał Miłecki <rafal@...ecki.pl>,
Andre Przywara <andre.przywara@....com>, Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
linux-fpga@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] fpga: Add Efinix Trion & Titanium serial SPI
programming driver
Hi Yilun, thanks for the review.
Am Fr., 12. Juli 2024 um 09:00 Uhr schrieb Xu Yilun <yilun.xu@...ux.intel.com>:
>
> On Fri, Jun 28, 2024 at 05:23:46PM +0200, iansdannapel@...il.com wrote:
> > From: Ian Dannapel <iansdannapel@...il.com>
> >
>
> Please don't reply to the previous series when you post a new version.
sure
>
> > Add a new driver for loading binary firmware using "SPI passive
>
> Loading to some nvram or reporgraming to FPGA logic blocks.
>
> > programming" on Efinix FPGAs.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Ian Dannapel <iansdannapel@...il.com>
> > ---
> > drivers/fpga/Kconfig | 8 +
> > drivers/fpga/Makefile | 1 +
> > drivers/fpga/efinix-trion-spi-passive.c | 219 ++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > 3 files changed, 228 insertions(+)
> > create mode 100644 drivers/fpga/efinix-trion-spi-passive.c
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/fpga/Kconfig b/drivers/fpga/Kconfig
> > index 37b35f58f0df..25579510e49e 100644
> > --- a/drivers/fpga/Kconfig
> > +++ b/drivers/fpga/Kconfig
> > @@ -83,6 +83,14 @@ config FPGA_MGR_XILINX_SPI
> > FPGA manager driver support for Xilinx FPGA configuration
> > over slave serial interface.
> >
> > +config FPGA_MGR_EFINIX_SPI
> > + tristate "Efinix FPGA configuration over SPI passive"
> > + depends on SPI
> > + help
> > + This option enables support for the FPGA manager driver to
> > + configure Efinix Trion and Titanium Series FPGAs over SPI
> > + using passive serial mode.
> > +
> > config FPGA_MGR_ICE40_SPI
> > tristate "Lattice iCE40 SPI"
> > depends on OF && SPI
> > diff --git a/drivers/fpga/Makefile b/drivers/fpga/Makefile
> > index aeb89bb13517..1a95124ff847 100644
> > --- a/drivers/fpga/Makefile
> > +++ b/drivers/fpga/Makefile
> > @@ -18,6 +18,7 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_FPGA_MGR_TS73XX) += ts73xx-fpga.o
> > obj-$(CONFIG_FPGA_MGR_XILINX_CORE) += xilinx-core.o
> > obj-$(CONFIG_FPGA_MGR_XILINX_SELECTMAP) += xilinx-selectmap.o
> > obj-$(CONFIG_FPGA_MGR_XILINX_SPI) += xilinx-spi.o
> > +obj-$(CONFIG_FPGA_MGR_EFINIX_SPI) += efinix-trion-spi-passive.o
> > obj-$(CONFIG_FPGA_MGR_ZYNQ_FPGA) += zynq-fpga.o
> > obj-$(CONFIG_FPGA_MGR_ZYNQMP_FPGA) += zynqmp-fpga.o
> > obj-$(CONFIG_FPGA_MGR_VERSAL_FPGA) += versal-fpga.o
> > diff --git a/drivers/fpga/efinix-trion-spi-passive.c b/drivers/fpga/efinix-trion-spi-passive.c
> > new file mode 100644
> > index 000000000000..eb2592e788b9
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/drivers/fpga/efinix-trion-spi-passive.c
> > @@ -0,0 +1,219 @@
> > +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only
> > +/*
> > + * Trion and Titanium Series FPGA SPI Passive Programming Driver
> > + *
> > + * Copyright (C) 2024 iris-GmbH infrared & intelligent sensors
> > + *
> > + * Ian Dannapel <iansdannapel@...il.com>
> > + *
> > + * Manage Efinix FPGA firmware that is loaded over SPI using
> > + * the serial configuration interface.
> > + */
> > +
> > +#include <linux/delay.h>
> > +#include <linux/device.h>
> > +#include <linux/fpga/fpga-mgr.h>
> > +#include <linux/gpio/consumer.h>
> > +#include <linux/module.h>
> > +#include <linux/mod_devicetable.h>
> > +#include <linux/of.h>
> > +#include <linux/spi/spi.h>
> > +#include <linux/sizes.h>
> > +
> > +struct efinix_spi_conf {
> > + struct spi_device *spi;
> > + struct gpio_desc *cdone;
> > + struct gpio_desc *creset;
> > + struct gpio_desc *cs;
> > +};
> > +
> > +static int get_cdone_gpio(struct fpga_manager *mgr)
>
> Is it better use 'struct efinix_spi_conf *conf' as parameter?
>
> Same for the following functions.
>
> > +{
> > + struct efinix_spi_conf *conf = mgr->priv;
> > + int ret;
> > +
> > + ret = gpiod_get_value(conf->cdone);
> > + if (ret < 0)
> > + dev_err(&mgr->dev, "Error reading CDONE (%d)\n", ret);
> > +
> > + return ret;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static void reset(struct fpga_manager *mgr)
>
> Please unify the naming of the internal functions. You use
> 'efinix_spi_apply_clk_cycles()' below.
>
> > +{
> > + struct efinix_spi_conf *conf = mgr->priv;
> > +
> > + gpiod_set_value(conf->creset, 1);
> > + /* wait tCRESET_N */
> > + usleep_range(5, 15);
> > + gpiod_set_value(conf->creset, 0);
> > +}
> > +
> > +static enum fpga_mgr_states efinix_spi_state(struct fpga_manager *mgr)
> > +{
> > + struct efinix_spi_conf *conf = mgr->priv;
> > +
> > + if (conf->cdone && get_cdone_gpio(mgr) == 1)
> > + return FPGA_MGR_STATE_OPERATING;
> > +
> > + return FPGA_MGR_STATE_UNKNOWN;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static int efinix_spi_apply_clk_cycles(struct fpga_manager *mgr)
> > +{
> > + struct efinix_spi_conf *conf = mgr->priv;
> > + char data[13] = {0};
> > +
> > + return spi_write(conf->spi, data, sizeof(data));
> > +}
> > +
> > +static int efinix_spi_write_init(struct fpga_manager *mgr,
> > + struct fpga_image_info *info,
> > + const char *buf, size_t count)
> > +{
> > + struct efinix_spi_conf *conf = mgr->priv;
> > +
> > + if (info->flags & FPGA_MGR_PARTIAL_RECONFIG) {
> > + dev_err(&mgr->dev, "Partial reconfiguration not supported\n");
> > + return -EINVAL;
> > + }
> > +
> > + /* reset with chip select active */
> > + gpiod_set_value(conf->cs, 1);
>
> Why operating chip selective at SPI client driver? Isn't it the job for SPI
> controller?
to enter the passive programming mode, a reset must be executed while
the chip select is active.
The is controlling the chip select from here, since I expect that the
SPI controller to only activate
the CS when communicating.
>
> > + usleep_range(5, 15);
> > + reset(mgr);
> > +
> > + /* wait tDMIN */
> > + usleep_range(100, 150);
> > +
> > + return 0;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static int efinix_spi_write(struct fpga_manager *mgr, const char *buf,
> > + size_t count)
> > +{
> > + struct efinix_spi_conf *conf = mgr->priv;
> > + int ret;
> > +
> > + ret = spi_write(conf->spi, buf, count);
> > + if (ret) {
> > + dev_err(&mgr->dev, "SPI error in firmware write: %d\n",
> > + ret);
> > + return ret;
> > + }
> > +
> > + /* append at least 100 clock cycles */
> > + efinix_spi_apply_clk_cycles(mgr);
> > +
> > + /* release chip select */
> > + gpiod_set_value(conf->cs, 0);
>
> Is it correct? What if there is remaining data to write?
I assumed that the spi controller should write complete buffer and
decide on the transfer block size,
so there shouldn't be any remaining data. Can someone confirm?
>
> > +
> > + return 0;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static int efinix_spi_write_complete(struct fpga_manager *mgr,
> > + struct fpga_image_info *info)
> > +{
> > + struct efinix_spi_conf *conf = mgr->priv;
> > + unsigned long timeout =
> > + jiffies + usecs_to_jiffies(info->config_complete_timeout_us);
> > + bool expired = false;
> > + int done;
> > +
> > + if (conf->cdone) {
> > + while (!expired) {
> > + expired = time_after(jiffies, timeout);
> > +
> > + done = get_cdone_gpio(mgr);
> > + if (done < 0)
> > + return done;
> > +
> > + if (done)
> > + break;
> > + }
> > + }
> > +
> > + if (expired)
> > + return -ETIMEDOUT;
> > +
> > + /* wait tUSER */
> > + usleep_range(75, 125);
> > +
> > + return 0;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static const struct fpga_manager_ops efinix_spi_ops = {
> > + .state = efinix_spi_state,
> > + .write_init = efinix_spi_write_init,
> > + .write = efinix_spi_write,
> > + .write_complete = efinix_spi_write_complete,
> > +};
> > +
> > +static int efinix_spi_probe(struct spi_device *spi)
> > +{
> > + struct efinix_spi_conf *conf;
> > + struct fpga_manager *mgr;
> > +
> > + conf = devm_kzalloc(&spi->dev, sizeof(*conf), GFP_KERNEL);
> > + if (!conf)
> > + return -ENOMEM;
> > +
> > + conf->spi = spi;
> > +
> > + conf->creset = devm_gpiod_get(&spi->dev, "creset", GPIOD_OUT_HIGH);
> > + if (IS_ERR(conf->creset))
> > + return dev_err_probe(&spi->dev, PTR_ERR(conf->creset),
> > + "Failed to get RESET gpio\n");
> > +
> > + conf->cs = devm_gpiod_get(&spi->dev, "cs", GPIOD_OUT_HIGH);
> > + if (IS_ERR(conf->cs))
> > + return dev_err_probe(&spi->dev, PTR_ERR(conf->cs),
> > + "Failed to get CHIP_SELECT gpio\n");
> > +
> > + if (!(spi->mode & SPI_CPHA) || !(spi->mode & SPI_CPOL))
> > + return dev_err_probe(&spi->dev, PTR_ERR(conf->cs),
> > + "Unsupported SPI mode, set CPHA and CPOL\n");
> > +
> > + conf->cdone = devm_gpiod_get_optional(&spi->dev, "cdone", GPIOD_IN);
> > + if (IS_ERR(conf->cdone))
> > + return dev_err_probe(&spi->dev, PTR_ERR(conf->cdone),
> > + "Failed to get CDONE gpio\n");
> > +
> > + mgr = devm_fpga_mgr_register(&spi->dev,
> > + "Efinix SPI Passive Programming FPGA Manager",
> > + &efinix_spi_ops, conf);
> > +
> > + return PTR_ERR_OR_ZERO(mgr);
> > +}
> > +
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_OF
> > +static const struct of_device_id efnx_spi_of_match[] = {
> > + { .compatible = "efinix,trion-spi-passive", },
> > + { .compatible = "efinix,titanium-spi-passive", },
> > + {}
> > +};
> > +MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, efnx_spi_of_match);
> > +#endif
> > +
> > +static const struct spi_device_id efinix_ids[] = {
> > + { "trion-spi-passive", 0 },
> > + { "titanium-spi-passive", 0 },
> > + {},
> > +};
> > +MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(spi, efinix_ids);
> > +
> > +
>
> remove the extra blank line.
>
> > +static struct spi_driver efinix_spi_passive_driver = {
> > + .driver = {
> > + .name = "efinix-fpga-spi-passive",
> > + .of_match_table = of_match_ptr(efnx_spi_of_match),
>
> Is it OK remove CONFIG_OF & of_match_ptr()?
I don't think it could work without device tree support
>
> Thanks,
> Yilun
>
> > + },
> > + .probe = efinix_spi_probe,
> > + .id_table = efinix_ids,
> > +};
> > +
> > +module_spi_driver(efinix_spi_passive_driver);
> > +
> > +MODULE_LICENSE("GPL");
> > +MODULE_AUTHOR("Ian Dannapel <iansdannapel@...il.com>");
> > +MODULE_DESCRIPTION("Load Efinix FPGA firmware over SPI passive");
> > --
> > 2.34.1
> >
> >
I will soon prepare a v3 for the rest.
Thanks
Ian
Powered by blists - more mailing lists