linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] remoteproc: imx_rproc: add power mode check for remote core attachment

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

Message-ID: <20250512141336.b72ga37qtlrvgaut@hiago-nb>
Date: Mon, 12 May 2025 11:13:36 -0300
From: Hiago De Franco <hiagofranco@...il.com>
To: Peng Fan <peng.fan@....nxp.com>
Cc: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>,
	Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@...aro.org>,
	linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, linux-remoteproc@...r.kernel.org,
	Shawn Guo <shawnguo@...nel.org>,
	Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>,
	Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>,
	Hiago De Franco <hiago.franco@...adex.com>, imx@...ts.linux.dev,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	daniel.baluta@....com, iuliana.prodan@....nxp.com,
	Fabio Estevam <festevam@...il.com>,
	Pengutronix Kernel Team <kernel@...gutronix.de>,
	Peng Fan <peng.fan@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] remoteproc: imx_rproc: add power mode check for
 remote core attachment

Hi Peng,

On Mon, May 12, 2025 at 12:56:13PM +0800, Peng Fan wrote:
>
> Ulf's new API dev_pm_genpd_is_on needs to run after power domain attached.
>
> But if run after power domain attached, there is no API to know whether
> M4 is kicked by bootloader or now.
>
> Even imx_rproc_attach_pd has a check for single power domain, but I just
> give a look again on current i.MX8QM/QX, all are using two power domain
> entries.
>
> >
> >>
> >> In this way we don't need to export unnecessary firmware functions
> >> from firmware/imx/misc.c, as patch1/3 does.
>
>
> I think still need to export firmware API. My idea is
> 1. introduce a new firmware API and put under firmware/imx/power.c
> 2. Use this new firmware API in imx_rproc.c
> 3. Replace scu-pd.c to use this new firmware API.
>
> Or
> 1. Export the API in scu-pd.c
> 2. Use the API in imx_rproc.c
>
> With approach two, you need to handle them in three trees in one patchset:
> imx/pd/rproc.
>
> With approach one, you need to handle two trees in one patchset: imx/rproc tree,
> then after done, pd tree

This patch series is already implementing approach one, as I understand,
right?

The difference is I moved this API from drivers/pmdomain/imx/scu-pd.c to
firmware/imx/misc.c, and exported it there. But you think I should
create this new file firmware/imx/power.c and move the API from scu-pd.c
to power.c, is my understanding correct?

>
> Regards,
> Peng

Best Regards,
Hiago.