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: <56b63a39-ea4d-4edf-9295-ca28c83655c8@ti.com> Date: Sat, 7 Sep 2024 15:41:38 +0530 From: "Kumar, Udit" <u-kumar1@...com> To: Beleswar Padhi <b-padhi@...com>, <andersson@...nel.org>, <mathieu.poirier@...aro.org> CC: <afd@...com>, <hnagalla@...com>, <s-anna@...com>, <linux-remoteproc@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH] remoteproc: k3-r5: Decouple firmware booting from probe routine On 9/6/2024 3:10 PM, Beleswar Padhi wrote: > The current implementation of the waiting mechanism in probe() waits for > the 'released_from_reset' flag to be set which is done in > k3_r5_rproc_prepare() as part of rproc_fw_boot(). This causes unexpected > failures in cases where the firmware is unavailable at boot time, > resulting in probe failure and removal of the remoteproc handles in the > sysfs paths. I won't say failure, I will say this is behavior of driver. Driver expect firmware to be available , but I agree driver should be able to execute with/without firmware availability. > To address this, the waiting mechanism is refactored out of the probe > routine into the appropriate k3_r5_rproc_prepare/unprepare() and > k3_r5_rproc_start/stop() functions. This allows the probe routine to > complete without depending on firmware booting, while still maintaining > the required power-synchronization between cores. > > Fixes: 61f6f68447ab ("remoteproc: k3-r5: Wait for core0 power-up before powering up core1") > Signed-off-by: Beleswar Padhi <b-padhi@...com> > --- > Posted this as a Fix as this was breaking usecases where we wanted to load a > firmware by writing to sysfs handles in userspace. > > drivers/remoteproc/ti_k3_r5_remoteproc.c | 170 ++++++++++++++++------- > 1 file changed, 118 insertions(+), 52 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/ti_k3_r5_remoteproc.c b/drivers/remoteproc/ti_k3_r5_remoteproc.c > [..] > + core0 = list_first_entry(&cluster->cores, struct k3_r5_core, elem); > + core1 = list_last_entry(&cluster->cores, struct k3_r5_core, elem); > + if (cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_SPLIT && core == core1 && > + core0->released_from_reset == false) { > + ret = wait_event_interruptible_timeout(cluster->core_transition, > + core0->released_from_reset, > + msecs_to_jiffies(2000)); only one wait in start should be good enough, > + if (ret <= 0) { > + dev_err(dev, "can not power up core1 before core0"); > + return -EPERM; > + } > + } > + > ret = ti_sci_proc_get_status(core->tsp, &boot_vec, &cfg, &ctrl, &stat); > if (ret < 0) > return ret; > @@ -470,6 +492,12 @@ static int k3_r5_rproc_prepare(struct rproc *rproc) > return ret; > } > > + /* Notify all threads in the wait queue when core state has changed so > + * that threads waiting for this condition can be executed. > + */ > + core->released_from_reset = true; > + wake_up_interruptible(&cluster->core_transition); > + > /* > * Newer IP revisions like on J7200 SoCs support h/w auto-initialization > * of TCMs, so there is no need to perform the s/w memzero. This bit is > @@ -515,14 +543,46 @@ static int k3_r5_rproc_unprepare(struct rproc *rproc) > { > struct k3_r5_rproc *kproc = rproc->priv; > struct k3_r5_cluster *cluster = kproc->cluster; > - struct k3_r5_core *core = kproc->core; > + struct k3_r5_core *core0, *core1, *core = kproc->core; why you need wait in unprepare/stop, In case you are failing during firmware load or so then already we are in bad state. if this is call from user land then, i don't except anyone will auto trigger stopping of core-0 IMO, in unprepare/stop, if action is attempted on core1 with core-0 ON, simply return error. > [..] > @@ -629,7 +702,7 @@ static int k3_r5_rproc_stop(struct rproc *rproc) > struct k3_r5_rproc *kproc = rproc->priv; > struct k3_r5_cluster *cluster = kproc->cluster; > struct device *dev = kproc->dev; >
Powered by blists - more mailing lists