From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-13.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER, INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7BFF4C433E0 for ; Wed, 17 Feb 2021 21:25:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from merlin.infradead.org (merlin.infradead.org [205.233.59.134]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2A1EF60241 for ; Wed, 17 Feb 2021 21:25:27 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 2A1EF60241 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=linaro.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=merlin.20170209; h=Sender:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-Type:Cc:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post:List-Archive: List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:References:Message-ID: Subject:To:From:Date:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Owner; bh=JgLq6sfyRrBA3RIcx+YB+1EVk+Qafo4SjHOTs0SV6OE=; b=yw9CLfE6z6kTGoV+rb7h99v9U da6vt30bb/ZAKG1ASwtOWMTRjj5BGUIxY4Na5Y+Tc2DEwChiEW05JNjGHlY5nIaKHb+3SW3VULZHC EbSZ8m4RBaRyLLEHJaLYSMt5uiQDTsHSG87R6gButRXAlGQx+O5VE5hZHGsEEHFxwlF13FbDWDTZ1 aRl1MHhjhHbk4uWT9tjynJSjo7sPLo9LCjdRxg4I031ZKt1C2E5mJWi/PMBbBpPi2lMvGUUGdvfBL WmG5MKnxx/6F6P/JR0tsohLuBi5wUJ2F345f2SAJY2dcuDltQzqrxHHBUeE1j6SOHRB8VUhj3w6l5 t66l9U7bw==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=merlin.infradead.org) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1lCUHm-0006W9-26; Wed, 17 Feb 2021 21:23:02 +0000 Received: from mail-pj1-x102f.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4864:20::102f]) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1lCUHi-0006VN-N3 for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Wed, 17 Feb 2021 21:23:00 +0000 Received: by mail-pj1-x102f.google.com with SMTP id fa16so60501pjb.1 for ; Wed, 17 Feb 2021 13:22:56 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linaro.org; s=google; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=lz+gd9XLG0rhSSAchXuyyUA0mNTMvFE42OMhF4DhPbE=; b=KyPBJ/D53KbI8/rVY3vfzseq91VqmpyG98E96l1KleiNrKjv8gjydCgSJAsixn5PVy iC3QO8zPP7Z6ijeTqgyWp1WodvtCNom1OXu7aBMThhloLbcfTBWrgUUE7newf0ARKqrD w7cV1wlrirFzClIYZxHNVa3RAR4Xg1fUQlaqp0x2ESkhtdWUOKsUp8v+yW2uhK3kd1rs 1poLhqpd7TjpxrQkZHoxpRThp7iBJqSfPACUXeoI+K5l1GS7CsQhPrnhVmBfTOL+EK/j Msk0DSfNGvLA6ty0FXUUVIYXH59dcVuoAM8vhaZHjgM2ZT8utjhYgUDlwu0GdQxyGmlF xNIg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=lz+gd9XLG0rhSSAchXuyyUA0mNTMvFE42OMhF4DhPbE=; b=N9um4xyh/w9j48/lmV0Fj37Cp7ZIU9e8MF65CX2Heh80h2pZLByyYl13w57lOQgKdq emNQUefDFjge58X187uN2j9rg0vv09OeE5oIYptGSwbXld/ihzLRXik5zdbmPuAvjzYE q9O/Kkw5Bh9dOe7zBgsLX3EIUzKUyaAaYRBw00z+OalvA6InQEFCQVFzI81w7/ZzzZ+h VvFJMt6Lqx1InEeu/puunsv5JzBnVeiO1dl6cbLthO6/Ic/I3hRxhYgs4E/rYhLjMpcq dofbCgA5h2Drfev5wQhk16EU/LYjDRT+i2qRwqL7cm1UC/63ULKKyj393sHpbTejpOcn OP/Q== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532VH08Uv3EuybsUEfcFu2M8yebfRir+tyrhYMUcWOPEut/RqFOk S0O5mM3v3A7owneDYxCt0rjLtg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxF6/L5bQjUFhTNg5HWYRKopFPRmpNg0DDkZVoV7x5SnkBc0oDRP2eV6PB5sjHyMSsQCo11cw== X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:900c:b029:e3:2313:20d5 with SMTP id a12-20020a170902900cb02900e3231320d5mr962555plp.62.1613596974417; Wed, 17 Feb 2021 13:22:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from xps15 (S0106889e681aac74.cg.shawcable.net. [68.147.0.187]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id e6sm3142725pfd.5.2021.02.17.13.22.52 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 17 Feb 2021 13:22:53 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 17 Feb 2021 14:22:51 -0700 From: Mathieu Poirier To: Arnaud POULIQUEN Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 07/19] remoteproc: Add new get_loaded_rsc_table() to rproc_ops Message-ID: <20210217212251.GA2800385@xps15> References: <20210211234627.2669674-1-mathieu.poirier@linaro.org> <20210211234627.2669674-8-mathieu.poirier@linaro.org> <406fe414-f454-c91d-8bbd-ce323a9612e7@foss.st.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <406fe414-f454-c91d-8bbd-ce323a9612e7@foss.st.com> X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20210217_162259_072136_38389DBD X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 43.14 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: ohad@wizery.com, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, alexandre.torgue@st.com, linux-remoteproc@vger.kernel.org, arnaud.pouliquen@st.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, bjorn.andersson@linaro.org, robh+dt@kernel.org, mcoquelin.stm32@gmail.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On Mon, Feb 15, 2021 at 02:10:10PM +0100, Arnaud POULIQUEN wrote: > Hi Mathieu, > > On 2/12/21 12:46 AM, Mathieu Poirier wrote: > > Add a new get_loaded_rsc_table() operation in order to support > > scenarios where the remoteproc core has booted a remote processor > > and detaches from it. When re-attaching to the remote processor, > > the core needs to know where the resource table has been placed > > in memory. > > > > Signed-off-by: Mathieu Poirier > > --- > > New for V5: > > - Added function rproc_set_loaded_rsc_table() to keep rproc_attach() clean. > > - Setting ->cached_table, ->table_ptr and ->table_sz in the remoteproc core > > rather than the platform drivers. > > --- > > drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c | 35 ++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_internal.h | 10 +++++++ > > include/linux/remoteproc.h | 6 +++- > > 3 files changed, 50 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c > > index e6606d10a4c8..741bc20de437 100644 > > --- a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c > > +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c > > @@ -1537,6 +1537,35 @@ static int rproc_fw_boot(struct rproc *rproc, const struct firmware *fw) > > return ret; > > } > > > > +static int rproc_set_loaded_rsc_table(struct rproc *rproc) > > +{ > > + struct resource_table *table_ptr; > > + struct device *dev = &rproc->dev; > > + size_t table_sz; > > + int ret; > > + > > + table_ptr = rproc_get_loaded_rsc_table(rproc, &table_sz); > > + if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(table_ptr)) { > > + if (!table_ptr) > > + ret = -EINVAL; > > I did few tests on this showing that this approach does not cover all use cases. > > The first one is a firmware without resource table. In this case table_ptr > should be null, or we have to consider the -ENOENT error as a non error usecase. > Right, I'll provision for those cases. > The second one, more tricky, is a firmware started by the remoteproc framework. > In this case the resource table address is retrieved from the ELF file by the > core part. Correct. > So if we detach and reattach rproc_get_loaded_rsc_table cannot return the > address. Look to me that we should have also an alocation of the clean_table in > rproc_start and then to keep the memory allocated until a shutdown. I assumed the address of the resource table found in the ELF image was the same as the one known by the platform driver. In hindsight I realise the platform driver may not know that address. > > That said regarding the complexity to re-attach, I wonder if it would not be > better to focus first on a simple detach, and address the reattachment in a > separate series, to move forward in stages. I agree that OFFLINE -> RUNNING -> DETACHED -> ATTACHED is introducing some complexity related to the management of the resource table that where not expected. We could concentrate on a simple detach and see where that takes us. It would also mean to get rid of the "autonomous-on-core-shutdown" DT binding. Thanks, Mathieu > > Regards, > Arnaud > > > + else > > + ret = PTR_ERR(table_ptr); > > + > > + dev_err(dev, "can't load resource table: %d\n", ret); > > + return ret; > > + } > > + > > + /* > > + * The resource table is already loaded in device memory, no need > > + * to work with a cached table. > > + */ > > + rproc->cached_table = NULL; > > + rproc->table_ptr = table_ptr; > > + rproc->table_sz = table_sz; > > + > > + return 0; > > +} > > + > > /* > > * Attach to remote processor - similar to rproc_fw_boot() but without > > * the steps that deal with the firmware image. > > @@ -1556,6 +1585,12 @@ static int rproc_attach(struct rproc *rproc) > > return ret; > > } > > > > + ret = rproc_set_loaded_rsc_table(rproc); > > + if (ret) { > > + dev_err(dev, "can't load resource table: %d\n", ret); > > + goto disable_iommu; > > + } > > + > > /* reset max_notifyid */ > > rproc->max_notifyid = -1; > > > > diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_internal.h b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_internal.h > > index c34002888d2c..4f73aac7e60d 100644 > > --- a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_internal.h > > +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_internal.h > > @@ -177,6 +177,16 @@ struct resource_table *rproc_find_loaded_rsc_table(struct rproc *rproc, > > return NULL; > > } > > > > +static inline > > +struct resource_table *rproc_get_loaded_rsc_table(struct rproc *rproc, > > + size_t *size) > > +{ > > + if (rproc->ops->get_loaded_rsc_table) > > + return rproc->ops->get_loaded_rsc_table(rproc, size); > > + > > + return NULL; > > +} > > + > > static inline > > bool rproc_u64_fit_in_size_t(u64 val) > > { > > diff --git a/include/linux/remoteproc.h b/include/linux/remoteproc.h > > index 6b0a0ed30a03..51538a7d120d 100644 > > --- a/include/linux/remoteproc.h > > +++ b/include/linux/remoteproc.h > > @@ -368,7 +368,9 @@ enum rsc_handling_status { > > * RSC_HANDLED if resource was handled, RSC_IGNORED if not handled and a > > * negative value on error > > * @load_rsc_table: load resource table from firmware image > > - * @find_loaded_rsc_table: find the loaded resouce table > > + * @find_loaded_rsc_table: find the loaded resource table from firmware image > > + * @get_loaded_rsc_table: get resource table installed in memory > > + * by external entity > > * @load: load firmware to memory, where the remote processor > > * expects to find it > > * @sanity_check: sanity check the fw image > > @@ -390,6 +392,8 @@ struct rproc_ops { > > int offset, int avail); > > struct resource_table *(*find_loaded_rsc_table)( > > struct rproc *rproc, const struct firmware *fw); > > + struct resource_table *(*get_loaded_rsc_table)( > > + struct rproc *rproc, size_t *size); > > int (*load)(struct rproc *rproc, const struct firmware *fw); > > int (*sanity_check)(struct rproc *rproc, const struct firmware *fw); > > u64 (*get_boot_addr)(struct rproc *rproc, const struct firmware *fw); > > _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel