| 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: <txdkvdzqiqevwripzxljaxictuy2kn6jbk3hoolj3vgth67mx5@3qnpawbf6243>
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2024 09:44:36 +0300
From: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org>
To: Shivnandan Kumar <quic_kshivnan@...cinc.com>
Cc: Sibi Sankar <quic_sibis@...cinc.com>,
Jassi Brar <jassisinghbrar@...il.com>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>, Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
cros-qcom-dts-watchers@...omium.org, Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>,
Konrad Dybcio <konradybcio@...nel.org>, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, Ramakrishna Gottimukkula <quic_rgottimu@...cinc.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] mailbox: qcom-cpucp-mbox: Add support for SC7280
CPUCP mailbox controller
On Tue, Sep 24, 2024 at 10:39:40AM GMT, Shivnandan Kumar wrote:
> The SC7280 CPUCP mailbox controller is compatible with legacy mailbox
> hardware.
> Implement support for this functionality which enable HLOS to
s/HLOS/Linux/
> CPUCP communication.
This enables Linux to do this and that.
>
> Signed-off-by: Shivnandan Kumar <quic_kshivnan@...cinc.com>
> ---
> drivers/mailbox/qcom-cpucp-mbox.c | 156 +++++++++++++++++++++++-------
> 1 file changed, 122 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/mailbox/qcom-cpucp-mbox.c b/drivers/mailbox/qcom-cpucp-mbox.c
> index e5437c294803..faae6e069ea1 100644
> --- a/drivers/mailbox/qcom-cpucp-mbox.c
> +++ b/drivers/mailbox/qcom-cpucp-mbox.c
> @@ -13,18 +13,24 @@
> #include <linux/platform_device.h>
>
> #define APSS_CPUCP_IPC_CHAN_SUPPORTED 3
> -#define APSS_CPUCP_MBOX_CMD_OFF 0x4
> -
> -/* Tx Registers */
> -#define APSS_CPUCP_TX_MBOX_CMD(i) (0x100 + ((i) * 8))
>
> /* Rx Registers */
> -#define APSS_CPUCP_RX_MBOX_CMD(i) (0x100 + ((i) * 8))
> -#define APSS_CPUCP_RX_MBOX_MAP 0x4000
> -#define APSS_CPUCP_RX_MBOX_STAT 0x4400
> -#define APSS_CPUCP_RX_MBOX_CLEAR 0x4800
> -#define APSS_CPUCP_RX_MBOX_EN 0x4c00
> -#define APSS_CPUCP_RX_MBOX_CMD_MASK GENMASK_ULL(63, 0)
> +#define APSS_CPUCP_V2_RX_MBOX_CMD_MASK GENMASK_ULL(63, 0)
> +#define APSS_CPUCP_V1_SEND_IRQ_VAL BIT(28)
> +#define APSS_CPUCP_V1_CLEAR_IRQ_VAL BIT(3)
> +#define APSS_CPUCP_V1_STATUS_IRQ_VAL BIT(3)
> +
> +struct qcom_cpucp_mbox_desc {
> + u32 enable_reg;
> + u32 map_reg;
> + u32 rx_reg;
> + u32 tx_reg;
> + u32 status_reg;
> + u32 clear_reg;
> + u32 chan_stride;
> + bool v2_mbox;
> + u32 num_chans;
> +};
>
> /**
> * struct qcom_cpucp_mbox - Holder for the mailbox driver
> @@ -35,6 +41,7 @@
> */
> struct qcom_cpucp_mbox {
> struct mbox_chan chans[APSS_CPUCP_IPC_CHAN_SUPPORTED];
> + const struct qcom_cpucp_mbox_desc *desc;
> struct mbox_controller mbox;
> void __iomem *tx_base;
> void __iomem *rx_base;
> @@ -48,13 +55,40 @@ static inline int channel_number(struct mbox_chan *chan)
> static irqreturn_t qcom_cpucp_mbox_irq_fn(int irq, void *data)
qcom_cpucp_v1_mbox_irq_fn()
> {
> struct qcom_cpucp_mbox *cpucp = data;
> + const struct qcom_cpucp_mbox_desc *desc = cpucp->desc;
> + int i;
> +
> + for (i = 0; i < desc->num_chans; i++) {
> + u32 val = readl(cpucp->rx_base + desc->status_reg + (i * desc->chan_stride));
> + struct mbox_chan *chan = &cpucp->chans[i];
> + unsigned long flags;
> +
> + if (val & APSS_CPUCP_V1_STATUS_IRQ_VAL) {
> + writel(APSS_CPUCP_V1_CLEAR_IRQ_VAL,
> + cpucp->rx_base + desc->clear_reg + (i * desc->chan_stride));
> + /* Make sure reg write is complete before proceeding */
> + mb();
> + spin_lock_irqsave(&chan->lock, flags);
> + if (chan->cl)
> + mbox_chan_received_data(chan, NULL);
v1 clears IRQ before processing, v2 does it after pinging mbox subsys.
Is that expected? What warrants such a difference?
> + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&chan->lock, flags);
> + }
> + }
> +
> + return IRQ_HANDLED;
> +}
> +
> +static irqreturn_t qcom_cpucp_v2_mbox_irq_fn(int irq, void *data)
> +{
> + struct qcom_cpucp_mbox *cpucp = data;
> + const struct qcom_cpucp_mbox_desc *desc = cpucp->desc;
> u64 status;
> int i;
>
> - status = readq(cpucp->rx_base + APSS_CPUCP_RX_MBOX_STAT);
> + status = readq(cpucp->rx_base + desc->status_reg);
>
> - for_each_set_bit(i, (unsigned long *)&status, APSS_CPUCP_IPC_CHAN_SUPPORTED) {
> - u32 val = readl(cpucp->rx_base + APSS_CPUCP_RX_MBOX_CMD(i) + APSS_CPUCP_MBOX_CMD_OFF);
> + for_each_set_bit(i, (unsigned long *)&status, desc->num_chans) {
> + u32 val = readl(cpucp->rx_base + desc->rx_reg + (i * desc->chan_stride));
> struct mbox_chan *chan = &cpucp->chans[i];
> unsigned long flags;
>
> @@ -62,7 +96,7 @@ static irqreturn_t qcom_cpucp_mbox_irq_fn(int irq, void *data)
> spin_lock_irqsave(&chan->lock, flags);
> if (chan->cl)
> mbox_chan_received_data(chan, &val);
> - writeq(BIT(i), cpucp->rx_base + APSS_CPUCP_RX_MBOX_CLEAR);
> + writeq(BIT(i), cpucp->rx_base + desc->clear_reg);
> spin_unlock_irqrestore(&chan->lock, flags);
> }
>
> @@ -72,12 +106,15 @@ static irqreturn_t qcom_cpucp_mbox_irq_fn(int irq, void *data)
> static int qcom_cpucp_mbox_startup(struct mbox_chan *chan)
> {
> struct qcom_cpucp_mbox *cpucp = container_of(chan->mbox, struct qcom_cpucp_mbox, mbox);
> + const struct qcom_cpucp_mbox_desc *desc = cpucp->desc;
> unsigned long chan_id = channel_number(chan);
> u64 val;
>
> - val = readq(cpucp->rx_base + APSS_CPUCP_RX_MBOX_EN);
> - val |= BIT(chan_id);
> - writeq(val, cpucp->rx_base + APSS_CPUCP_RX_MBOX_EN);
> + if (desc->v2_mbox) {
> + val = readq(cpucp->rx_base + desc->enable_reg);
> + val |= BIT(chan_id);
> + writeq(val, cpucp->rx_base + desc->enable_reg);
> + }
So, startup and shutdown are effectively empty for v1 CPUCP chips? Could
you please add two separate families of functions and two separate
mbox_chan_ops instances? Which probably will mean one register less in
the qcom_cpucp_mbox_desc structure.
>
> return 0;
> }
> @@ -85,22 +122,26 @@ static int qcom_cpucp_mbox_startup(struct mbox_chan *chan)
> static void qcom_cpucp_mbox_shutdown(struct mbox_chan *chan)
> {
> struct qcom_cpucp_mbox *cpucp = container_of(chan->mbox, struct qcom_cpucp_mbox, mbox);
> + const struct qcom_cpucp_mbox_desc *desc = cpucp->desc;
> unsigned long chan_id = channel_number(chan);
> u64 val;
>
> - val = readq(cpucp->rx_base + APSS_CPUCP_RX_MBOX_EN);
> - val &= ~BIT(chan_id);
> - writeq(val, cpucp->rx_base + APSS_CPUCP_RX_MBOX_EN);
> + if (desc->v2_mbox) {
> + val = readq(cpucp->rx_base + desc->enable_reg);
> + val &= ~BIT(chan_id);
> + writeq(val, cpucp->rx_base + desc->enable_reg);
> + }
> }
>
> static int qcom_cpucp_mbox_send_data(struct mbox_chan *chan, void *data)
> {
> struct qcom_cpucp_mbox *cpucp = container_of(chan->mbox, struct qcom_cpucp_mbox, mbox);
> + const struct qcom_cpucp_mbox_desc *desc = cpucp->desc;
> + u32 val = desc->v2_mbox ? *(u32 *)data : APSS_CPUCP_V1_SEND_IRQ_VAL;
> unsigned long chan_id = channel_number(chan);
> - u32 *val = data;
> -
> - writel(*val, cpucp->tx_base + APSS_CPUCP_TX_MBOX_CMD(chan_id) + APSS_CPUCP_MBOX_CMD_OFF);
> + u32 offset = desc->v2_mbox ? (chan_id * desc->chan_stride) : 0;
>
> + writel(val, cpucp->tx_base + desc->tx_reg + offset);
> return 0;
> }
>
> @@ -112,41 +153,66 @@ static const struct mbox_chan_ops qcom_cpucp_mbox_chan_ops = {
>
> static int qcom_cpucp_mbox_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> {
> + const struct qcom_cpucp_mbox_desc *desc;
> struct device *dev = &pdev->dev;
> struct qcom_cpucp_mbox *cpucp;
> struct mbox_controller *mbox;
> + struct resource *res;
> int irq, ret;
>
> + desc = device_get_match_data(&pdev->dev);
> + if (!desc)
> + return -EINVAL;
> +
> cpucp = devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof(*cpucp), GFP_KERNEL);
> if (!cpucp)
> return -ENOMEM;
>
> - cpucp->rx_base = devm_of_iomap(dev, dev->of_node, 0, NULL);
> - if (IS_ERR(cpucp->rx_base))
> - return PTR_ERR(cpucp->rx_base);
> + cpucp->desc = desc;
> +
> + if (desc->v2_mbox) {
> + cpucp->rx_base = devm_of_iomap(dev, dev->of_node, 0, NULL);
> + if (IS_ERR(cpucp->rx_base))
> + return PTR_ERR(cpucp->rx_base);
> + /* Legacy mailbox quirks due to shared region with EPSS register space */
Does that mean that on these platforms cpucp should be a child node of the EPSS? Also it might be a high time when the drivers should be switched to use regmaps.
> + } else {
> + res = platform_get_resource(pdev, IORESOURCE_MEM, 0);
> + if (!res) {
> + dev_err(&pdev->dev, "Failed to get the device base address\n");
> + return -ENODEV;
> + }
> + cpucp->rx_base = devm_ioremap(dev, res->start, resource_size(res));
> + if (!cpucp->rx_base) {
> + dev_err(dev, "Failed to ioremap the cpucp rx irq addr\n");
> + return -ENOMEM;
> + }
> + }
>
> cpucp->tx_base = devm_of_iomap(dev, dev->of_node, 1, NULL);
> if (IS_ERR(cpucp->tx_base))
> return PTR_ERR(cpucp->tx_base);
>
> - writeq(0, cpucp->rx_base + APSS_CPUCP_RX_MBOX_EN);
> - writeq(0, cpucp->rx_base + APSS_CPUCP_RX_MBOX_CLEAR);
> - writeq(0, cpucp->rx_base + APSS_CPUCP_RX_MBOX_MAP);
> + if (desc->v2_mbox) {
> + writeq(0, cpucp->rx_base + desc->enable_reg);
> + writeq(0, cpucp->rx_base + desc->clear_reg);
> + writeq(0, cpucp->rx_base + desc->map_reg);
> + }
If these registers are only present on V2, there is no need to have them
in the qcom_cpucp_mbox_desc.
>
> irq = platform_get_irq(pdev, 0);
> if (irq < 0)
> return irq;
>
> - ret = devm_request_irq(dev, irq, qcom_cpucp_mbox_irq_fn,
> - IRQF_TRIGGER_HIGH, "apss_cpucp_mbox", cpucp);
> + ret = devm_request_irq(dev, irq, desc->v2_mbox ? qcom_cpucp_v2_mbox_irq_fn :
> + qcom_cpucp_mbox_irq_fn, IRQF_TRIGGER_HIGH, "apss_cpucp_mbox", cpucp);
> if (ret < 0)
> return dev_err_probe(dev, ret, "Failed to register irq: %d\n", irq);
>
> - writeq(APSS_CPUCP_RX_MBOX_CMD_MASK, cpucp->rx_base + APSS_CPUCP_RX_MBOX_MAP);
> + if (desc->v2_mbox)
> + writeq(APSS_CPUCP_V2_RX_MBOX_CMD_MASK, cpucp->rx_base + desc->map_reg);
>
> mbox = &cpucp->mbox;
> mbox->dev = dev;
> - mbox->num_chans = APSS_CPUCP_IPC_CHAN_SUPPORTED;
> + mbox->num_chans = desc->num_chans;
> mbox->chans = cpucp->chans;
> mbox->ops = &qcom_cpucp_mbox_chan_ops;
>
> @@ -157,8 +223,30 @@ static int qcom_cpucp_mbox_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> return 0;
> }
>
> +static const struct qcom_cpucp_mbox_desc sc7280_cpucp_mbox = {
> + .tx_reg = 0xC,
> + .chan_stride = 0x1000,
> + .status_reg = 0x30C,
> + .clear_reg = 0x308,
> + .v2_mbox = false,
> + .num_chans = 2,
> +};
> +
> +static const struct qcom_cpucp_mbox_desc x1e80100_cpucp_mbox = {
> + .rx_reg = 0x104,
> + .tx_reg = 0x104,
> + .chan_stride = 0x8,
> + .map_reg = 0x4000,
> + .status_reg = 0x4400,
> + .clear_reg = 0x4800,
> + .enable_reg = 0x4C00,
> + .v2_mbox = true,
> + .num_chans = 3,
> +};
> +
> static const struct of_device_id qcom_cpucp_mbox_of_match[] = {
> - { .compatible = "qcom,x1e80100-cpucp-mbox" },
> + { .compatible = "qcom,x1e80100-cpucp-mbox", .data = &x1e80100_cpucp_mbox},
> + { .compatible = "qcom,sc7280-cpucp-mbox", .data = &sc7280_cpucp_mbox},
Please keep the table sorted.
> {}
> };
> MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, qcom_cpucp_mbox_of_match);
> --
> 2.25.1
>
--
With best wishes
Dmitry
Powered by blists - more mailing lists