| 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: <4502a296-5380-4339-bfb1-1d741b74cf01@ti.com>
Date: Mon, 7 Apr 2025 08:29:38 -0500
From: Andrew Davis <afd@...com>
To: Beleswar Padhi <b-padhi@...com>, <andersson@...nel.org>,
<mathieu.poirier@...aro.org>
CC: <hnagalla@...com>, <u-kumar1@...com>, <jm@...com>,
<jan.kiszka@...mens.com>, <christophe.jaillet@...adoo.fr>,
<jkangas@...hat.com>, <eballetbo@...hat.com>,
<linux-remoteproc@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 01/26] remoteproc: k3-r5: Re-order internal memory
initialization function
On 3/17/25 7:05 AM, Beleswar Padhi wrote:
> The core's internal memory data structure will be refactored to be part
> of the k3_r5_rproc structure in a future commit. As a result, internal
> memory initialization will need to be performed inside
> k3_r5_cluster_rproc_init() after rproc_alloc().
>
> Therefore, move the internal memory initialization function,
> k3_r5_core_of_get_internal_memories() above k3_r5_rproc_init() so that
> it can be invoked from there.
>
> Signed-off-by: Beleswar Padhi <b-padhi@...com>
> ---
Just to keep things organized, does it make sense to also move
the other k3_r5_core_of_get_*_memories() up with this?
Also, you move k3_r5_release_tsp() up too but don't mention
that in the commit message.
Andrew
> drivers/remoteproc/ti_k3_r5_remoteproc.c | 158 +++++++++++------------
> 1 file changed, 79 insertions(+), 79 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/ti_k3_r5_remoteproc.c b/drivers/remoteproc/ti_k3_r5_remoteproc.c
> index dbc513c5569c..b2738b9a1b2d 100644
> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/ti_k3_r5_remoteproc.c
> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/ti_k3_r5_remoteproc.c
> @@ -1199,6 +1199,85 @@ static int k3_r5_rproc_configure_mode(struct k3_r5_rproc *kproc)
> return ret;
> }
>
> +static int k3_r5_core_of_get_internal_memories(struct platform_device *pdev,
> + struct k3_r5_core *core)
> +{
> + static const char * const mem_names[] = {"atcm", "btcm"};
> + struct device *dev = &pdev->dev;
> + struct resource *res;
> + int num_mems;
> + int i;
> +
> + num_mems = ARRAY_SIZE(mem_names);
> + core->mem = devm_kcalloc(dev, num_mems, sizeof(*core->mem), GFP_KERNEL);
> + if (!core->mem)
> + return -ENOMEM;
> +
> + for (i = 0; i < num_mems; i++) {
> + res = platform_get_resource_byname(pdev, IORESOURCE_MEM,
> + mem_names[i]);
> + if (!res) {
> + dev_err(dev, "found no memory resource for %s\n",
> + mem_names[i]);
> + return -EINVAL;
> + }
> + if (!devm_request_mem_region(dev, res->start,
> + resource_size(res),
> + dev_name(dev))) {
> + dev_err(dev, "could not request %s region for resource\n",
> + mem_names[i]);
> + return -EBUSY;
> + }
> +
> + /*
> + * TCMs are designed in general to support RAM-like backing
> + * memories. So, map these as Normal Non-Cached memories. This
> + * also avoids/fixes any potential alignment faults due to
> + * unaligned data accesses when using memcpy() or memset()
> + * functions (normally seen with device type memory).
> + */
> + core->mem[i].cpu_addr = devm_ioremap_wc(dev, res->start,
> + resource_size(res));
> + if (!core->mem[i].cpu_addr) {
> + dev_err(dev, "failed to map %s memory\n", mem_names[i]);
> + return -ENOMEM;
> + }
> + core->mem[i].bus_addr = res->start;
> +
> + /*
> + * TODO:
> + * The R5F cores can place ATCM & BTCM anywhere in its address
> + * based on the corresponding Region Registers in the System
> + * Control coprocessor. For now, place ATCM and BTCM at
> + * addresses 0 and 0x41010000 (same as the bus address on AM65x
> + * SoCs) based on loczrama setting
> + */
> + if (!strcmp(mem_names[i], "atcm")) {
> + core->mem[i].dev_addr = core->loczrama ?
> + 0 : K3_R5_TCM_DEV_ADDR;
> + } else {
> + core->mem[i].dev_addr = core->loczrama ?
> + K3_R5_TCM_DEV_ADDR : 0;
> + }
> + core->mem[i].size = resource_size(res);
> +
> + dev_dbg(dev, "memory %5s: bus addr %pa size 0x%zx va %pK da 0x%x\n",
> + mem_names[i], &core->mem[i].bus_addr,
> + core->mem[i].size, core->mem[i].cpu_addr,
> + core->mem[i].dev_addr);
> + }
> + core->num_mems = num_mems;
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static void k3_r5_release_tsp(void *data)
> +{
> + struct ti_sci_proc *tsp = data;
> +
> + ti_sci_proc_release(tsp);
> +}
> +
> static int k3_r5_cluster_rproc_init(struct platform_device *pdev)
> {
> struct k3_r5_cluster *cluster = platform_get_drvdata(pdev);
> @@ -1358,78 +1437,6 @@ static void k3_r5_cluster_rproc_exit(void *data)
> }
> }
>
> -static int k3_r5_core_of_get_internal_memories(struct platform_device *pdev,
> - struct k3_r5_core *core)
> -{
> - static const char * const mem_names[] = {"atcm", "btcm"};
> - struct device *dev = &pdev->dev;
> - struct resource *res;
> - int num_mems;
> - int i;
> -
> - num_mems = ARRAY_SIZE(mem_names);
> - core->mem = devm_kcalloc(dev, num_mems, sizeof(*core->mem), GFP_KERNEL);
> - if (!core->mem)
> - return -ENOMEM;
> -
> - for (i = 0; i < num_mems; i++) {
> - res = platform_get_resource_byname(pdev, IORESOURCE_MEM,
> - mem_names[i]);
> - if (!res) {
> - dev_err(dev, "found no memory resource for %s\n",
> - mem_names[i]);
> - return -EINVAL;
> - }
> - if (!devm_request_mem_region(dev, res->start,
> - resource_size(res),
> - dev_name(dev))) {
> - dev_err(dev, "could not request %s region for resource\n",
> - mem_names[i]);
> - return -EBUSY;
> - }
> -
> - /*
> - * TCMs are designed in general to support RAM-like backing
> - * memories. So, map these as Normal Non-Cached memories. This
> - * also avoids/fixes any potential alignment faults due to
> - * unaligned data accesses when using memcpy() or memset()
> - * functions (normally seen with device type memory).
> - */
> - core->mem[i].cpu_addr = devm_ioremap_wc(dev, res->start,
> - resource_size(res));
> - if (!core->mem[i].cpu_addr) {
> - dev_err(dev, "failed to map %s memory\n", mem_names[i]);
> - return -ENOMEM;
> - }
> - core->mem[i].bus_addr = res->start;
> -
> - /*
> - * TODO:
> - * The R5F cores can place ATCM & BTCM anywhere in its address
> - * based on the corresponding Region Registers in the System
> - * Control coprocessor. For now, place ATCM and BTCM at
> - * addresses 0 and 0x41010000 (same as the bus address on AM65x
> - * SoCs) based on loczrama setting
> - */
> - if (!strcmp(mem_names[i], "atcm")) {
> - core->mem[i].dev_addr = core->loczrama ?
> - 0 : K3_R5_TCM_DEV_ADDR;
> - } else {
> - core->mem[i].dev_addr = core->loczrama ?
> - K3_R5_TCM_DEV_ADDR : 0;
> - }
> - core->mem[i].size = resource_size(res);
> -
> - dev_dbg(dev, "memory %5s: bus addr %pa size 0x%zx va %pK da 0x%x\n",
> - mem_names[i], &core->mem[i].bus_addr,
> - core->mem[i].size, core->mem[i].cpu_addr,
> - core->mem[i].dev_addr);
> - }
> - core->num_mems = num_mems;
> -
> - return 0;
> -}
> -
> static int k3_r5_core_of_get_sram_memories(struct platform_device *pdev,
> struct k3_r5_core *core)
> {
> @@ -1487,13 +1494,6 @@ static int k3_r5_core_of_get_sram_memories(struct platform_device *pdev,
> return 0;
> }
>
> -static void k3_r5_release_tsp(void *data)
> -{
> - struct ti_sci_proc *tsp = data;
> -
> - ti_sci_proc_release(tsp);
> -}
> -
> static int k3_r5_core_of_init(struct platform_device *pdev)
> {
> struct device *dev = &pdev->dev;
Powered by blists - more mailing lists