Re: [PATCH v2 00/12] remoteproc: stm32: Add support for synchronising with M4

From: Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@linaro.org>
To: Arnaud POULIQUEN <arnaud.pouliquen@st.com>
Cc: bjorn.andersson@linaro.org, ohad@wizery.com,
	mcoquelin.stm32@gmail.com, alexandre.torgue@st.com,
	loic.pallardy@st.com, linux-remoteproc@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-stm32@st-md-mailman.stormreply.com,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/12] remoteproc: stm32: Add support for synchronising with M4
Date: Fri, 1 May 2020 11:59:37 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200501175937.GG18004@xps15> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <219771d3-b0a5-0ec7-7f20-d2055bcb0217@st.com>

On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 05:08:32PM +0200, Arnaud POULIQUEN wrote:
> Hi Mathieu,
> 
> On 4/24/20 10:24 PM, Mathieu Poirier wrote:
> > This patchset needs to be applied on top of this one [1].
> > 
> > It refactors the STM32 platform code in order to introduce support for
> > synchronising with the M4 remote processor that would have been started by
> > the boot loader or another entity.
> > 
> > It carries the same functionatlity as the previeous revision but account
> > for changes in the remoteproc core to support synchronisation scenarios.
> > Some RB tags have been removed when the content of the patch has strayed 
> > too far from the original version. See patch 3, 8, 9 and 12 for more
> > details.
> 
> I reviewed the series, and made some tests on my side.
> FYI, I do not answer to patches when tagged "Reviewed-by: Loic Pallardy" 
> and with no extra remark. So consider them as Reviewed-by me but not
> necessary to add the tag in commit, Reviewed-by: loic in commit is sufficient. 

Well, if you spent all this time reviewing the code might as well get credit for
it...  And it also helps maintainers get a feel for how many eyes have looked
at the code.

> 
> Concerning tests, it works find except the crash recovery from a sync start.
> But i suppose that you know the limitation, waiting Loic patches[1] update :)

As I commented in the patch itself, I'll fix this so that the condition leading
to the recovery limbo can't happen.

Thanks,
Mathieu

> 
> [1]: https://lkml.org/lkml/2020/3/11/403
> 
> Thanks a lot for your work!
> Arnaud
>  
> 
> > 
> > Tested on ST's mp157c board.
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > Mathieu
> > 
> > [1]. https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-remoteproc/list/?series=277049
> > [2]. https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-remoteproc/list/?series=239877
> > 
> > Mathieu Poirier (12):
> >   remoteproc: stm32: Decouple rproc from memory translation
> >   remoteproc: stm32: Request IRQ with platform device
> >   remoteproc: stm32: Decouple rproc from DT parsing
> >   remoteproc: stm32: Remove memory translation from DT parsing
> >   remoteproc: stm32: Parse syscon that will manage M4 synchronisation
> >   remoteproc: stm32: Get coprocessor state
> >   remoteproc: stm32: Get loaded resource table for synchronisation
> >   remoteproc: stm32: Introduce new start ops for synchronisation
> >   remoteproc: stm32: Update M4 state in stm32_rproc_stop()
> >   remoteproc: stm32: Introduce new parse fw ops for synchronisation
> >   remoteproc: stm32: Introduce new loaded rsc ops for synchronisation
> >   remoteproc: stm32: Set synchronisation state machine if needed
> > 
> >  drivers/remoteproc/stm32_rproc.c | 262 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
> >  1 file changed, 244 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
> > 