Re: [RFC] Integrate RPMSG/SMD into WWAN subsystem

[Stephan Gerhold <stephan@gerhold.net>]

Hi Loic,

On Fri, Jun 04, 2021 at 11:11:45PM +0200, Loic Poulain wrote:
> On Wed, 2 Jun 2021 at 20:20, Stephan Gerhold <stephan@gerhold.net> wrote:
> > I've been thinking about creating some sort of "RPMSG" driver for the
> > new WWAN subsystem; this would be used as a QMI/AT channel to the
> > integrated modem on some older Qualcomm SoCs such as MSM8916 and MSM8974.
> >
> > It's easy to confuse all the different approaches that Qualcomm has to
> > talk to their modems, so I will first try to briefly give an overview
> > about those that I'm familiar with:
> >
> > ---
> > There is USB and MHI that are mainly used to talk to "external" modems.
> >
> > For the integrated modems in many Qualcomm SoCs there is typically
> > a separate control and data path. They are not really related to each
> > other (e.g. currently no common parent device in sysfs).
> >
> > For the data path (network interface) there is "IPA" (drivers/net/ipa)
> > on newer SoCs or "BAM-DMUX" on some older SoCs (e.g. MSM8916/MSM8974).
> > I have a driver for BAM-DMUX that I hope to finish up and submit soon.
> >
> > The connection is set up via QMI. The messages are either sent via
> > a shared RPMSG channel (net/qrtr sockets in Linux) or via standalone
> > SMD/RPMSG channels (e.g. "DATA5_CNTL" for QMI and "DATA1" for AT).
> >
> > This gives a lot of possible combinations like BAM-DMUX+RPMSG
> > (MSM8916, MSM8974), or IPA+QRTR (SDM845) but also other funny
> > combinations like IPA+RPMSG (MSM8994) or BAM-DMUX+QRTR (MSM8937).
> >
> > Simply put, supporting all these in userspace like ModemManager
> > is a mess (Aleksander can probably confirm).
> > It would be nice if this could be simplified through the WWAN subsystem.
> >
> > It's not clear to me if or how well QRTR sockets can be mapped to a char
> > device for the WWAN subsystem, so for now I'm trying to focus on the
> > standalone RPMSG approach (for MSM8916, MSM8974, ...).
> > ---
> >
> > Currently ModemManager uses the RPMSG channels via the rpmsg-chardev
> > (drivers/rpmsg/rpmsg_char.c). It wasn't my idea to use it like this,
> > I just took that over from someone else. Realistically speaking, the
> > current approach isn't too different from the UCI "backdoor interface"
> > approach that was rejected for MHI...
> >
> > I kind of expected that I can just trivially copy some code from
> > rpmsg_char.c into a WWAN driver since they both end up as a simple char
> > device. But it looks like the abstractions in wwan_core are kind of
> > getting in the way here... As far as I can tell, they don't really fit
> > together with the RPMSG interface.
> >
> > For example there is rpmsg_send(...) (blocking) and rpmsg_trysend(...)
> > (non-blocking) and even a rpmsg_poll(...) [1] but I don't see a way to
> > get notified when the TX queue is full or no longer full so I can call
> > wwan_port_txon/off().
> >
> > Any suggestions or other thoughts?
> 
> It would be indeed nice to get this in the WWAN framework.
> I don't know much about rpmsg but I think it is straightforward for
> the RX path, the ept_cb can simply forward the buffers to
> wwan_port_rx.

Right, that part should be straightforward.

> For tx, simply call rpmsg_trysend() in the wwan tx
> callback and don't use the txon/off helpers. In short, keep it simple
> and check if you observe any issues.
> 

I'm not sure that's a good idea. This sounds like exactly the kind of
thing that might explode later just because I don't manage to get the
TX queue full in my tests. In that case, writing to the WWAN char dev
would not block, even if O_NONBLOCK is not set.

But I think you're right that it's probably easiest if I start with
that, see if I can get anything working at all ...

> And for sure you can propose changes in the WWAN framework if you
> think something is missing to support your specific case.
> 

... and then we can discuss that further on a RFC PATCH or something
like that. Does that sound good to you?

Thanks!
Stephan