linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 07/13] wifi: ath12k: add support for fixed QMI firmware memory

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <8fc38912-f1f2-438d-a8ab-bfabb31825fb@quicinc.com>
Date: Wed, 5 Feb 2025 15:29:06 +0530
From: Raj Kumar Bhagat <quic_rajkbhag@...cinc.com>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>, <ath12k@...ts.infradead.org>
CC: <linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org>, Kalle Valo <kvalo@...nel.org>,
        Rob
 Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
        Conor
 Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
        Jeff Johnson <jjohnson@...nel.org>, <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 07/13] wifi: ath12k: add support for fixed QMI firmware
 memory

On 2/5/2025 2:37 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 04/02/2025 10:06, Raj Kumar Bhagat wrote:
>> On 2/3/2025 3:42 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>> On 03/02/2025 10:44, Raj Kumar Bhagat wrote:
>>>> On 1/30/2025 1:16 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>>>> On 30/01/2025 05:35, Raj Kumar Bhagat wrote:
>>>>>> @@ -2646,6 +2663,136 @@ static int ath12k_qmi_alloc_target_mem_chunk(struct ath12k_base *ab)
>>>>>>  	return ret;
>>>>>>  }
>>>>>>  
>>>>>> +static int ath12k_qmi_assign_target_mem_chunk(struct ath12k_base *ab)
>>>>>> +{
>>>>>> +	struct device_node *mem_node;
>>>>>> +	struct resource res, m3_res;
>>>>>> +	u32 bdf_start_addr;
>>>>>> +	int i, idx, ret;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +	for (i = 0, idx = 0; i < ab->qmi.mem_seg_count; i++) {
>>>>>> +		switch (ab->qmi.target_mem[i].type) {
>>>>>> +		case HOST_DDR_REGION_TYPE:
>>>>>> +			mem_node = ath12k_core_get_reserved_mem_by_name(ab, "q6-region");
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Why cannot you use existing API for reserved memory -
>>>>> of_reserved_mem_lookup()?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The of_reserved_mem_lookup() requires reserved memory node to read the memory and
>>>> return in the structure "struct reserved_mem".
>>>>
>>>> The of_reserved_mem_lookup() would be used after we get the reserved memory node
>>>> using the API - ath12k_core_get_reserved_mem_by_name(ab, "q6-region");
>>>>
>>>> In next version we would use of_reserved_mem_lookup(), Something like below:
>>>>     mem_node = ath12k_core_get_reserved_mem_by_name(ab, "q6-region");
>>>
>>> Then why do you need ath12k_core_get_reserved_mem_by_name() in the first
>>> place? Just use of_reserved_mem_lookup() directly. Why do you need to
>>> parse phandle before of_reserved_mem_lookup()?
>>>
>>
>> Sorry, I'm having difficulty understanding this.
>> We have the WiFi node at ab->dev->of_node, but we don't have a node for the reserved-memory
>> 'q6-region'. The of_reserved_mem_lookup() function requires the device node for 'q6-region'.
>>
>> Could you please suggest how we can use of_reserved_mem_lookup() without obtaining the
>> 'q6-region' node first.
> 
> 
> Hm, it seems you are not using it for this device, so indeed you need to
> parse phandle. You can still code it simpler -
> of_property_match_string() is not necessary and
> of_address_to_resource()+of_node_put()  could be in the
> ath12k_core_get_reserved_mem()
> 

Thanks, will make it simpler.