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 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6D4F9C433EF for ; Wed, 1 Dec 2021 03:50:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S241583AbhLADxc (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Nov 2021 22:53:32 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:42044 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229886AbhLADxc (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Nov 2021 22:53:32 -0500 Received: from mail-oo1-xc36.google.com (mail-oo1-xc36.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::c36]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 06BB6C061574 for ; Tue, 30 Nov 2021 19:50:11 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-oo1-xc36.google.com with SMTP id g11-20020a4a754b000000b002c679a02b18so7388193oof.3 for ; Tue, 30 Nov 2021 19:50:11 -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=Vh64HlEJjPzjJ+Mpfa13ShJlj+Z94ObsnHICCNTz+Qs=; b=lgIhSMrQStWm/xh3G3jIw9VllTe2uKgdqLWQywK8mPMN+TqFpMnWA8BVqxedCNZIp0 tfQc8DXMlTjFF4Mh5ojJuwIVQesS4v57XTZM//Z39i1QChQU1Dsu1aGMXjBCicJXJm7B Jx4/Ht00O9olvh5hPGd/uv2678KjeqEYOfEFNoSpPbBvGMtvgOvM6aGOQuYBcokK1u1u INobD5negB4q1vdB3i4zUVAbOYa3ZkpJ3RDJYEwBZe4oXxE1moESg3Vr5ni+nfJVs1BR mGOXt2ti5p+WmIiRwXIuxwkmdNPwAXIIkZ1XJEYTm4BEMnYkCekrCuJHb57FTkGemFsW hiow== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=Vh64HlEJjPzjJ+Mpfa13ShJlj+Z94ObsnHICCNTz+Qs=; b=fxxi9PV380V0t0hbT8CrKuZYC7tA3toObbF9lC35SHN0SPcaDGuepiKCVCmPnAh6wF 5qXkpII401oGOE0on7YDkFRh3nBCWRZx7XaiyuH6b4nTK+eVu/2BnvfK/WGQoDt0Cy0r tjUI1ABylEiv/DC0he+uIpNfLeutxOQhkXdkbdCl9mlMoZutEFsw2c23CXnpRQxym76v xd/O0G9sJV4dd8n3c6JWAnrjS6tob5XLbEXn0Mk6/pAxs8qDwPSxzmLc9CwSi1ej0+nu g0AIOda0V2sNDVBgf4k4mOP7wPgZ4B2bliyZJZoAOndEjE30nTvz4Uoq3TuWJEnkkvQn ESSg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530WDVLbEqEhl3J0VydQA6kiWmpvTB2FeLrQOff5IfptoIv2oeIj bupLbEMaT5u0vgtnf+yryd/Ylw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzH+r5KszynhMHork3TPK+4l/u0Mu1pjmCk4Dh4XaNoVyejeWYQu/mXe80D4FYluMpd7xN6VQ== X-Received: by 2002:a4a:a641:: with SMTP id j1mr2714339oom.63.1638330611085; Tue, 30 Nov 2021 19:50:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from builder.lan (104-57-184-186.lightspeed.austtx.sbcglobal.net. [104.57.184.186]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id x16sm3574994otq.47.2021.11.30.19.50.10 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 30 Nov 2021 19:50:10 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2021 21:50:06 -0600 From: Bjorn Andersson To: Stephan Gerhold Cc: Andy Gross , linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, ~postmarketos/upstreaming@lists.sr.ht, Ohad Ben-Cohen , Mathieu Poirier , linux-remoteproc@vger.kernel.org, phone-devel@vger.kernel.org, Aleksander Morgado Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] remoteproc: qcom_q6v5_mss: Populate additional devices from DT Message-ID: References: <20211129132930.6901-1-stephan@gerhold.net> <20211129132930.6901-2-stephan@gerhold.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20211129132930.6901-2-stephan@gerhold.net> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org On Mon 29 Nov 07:29 CST 2021, Stephan Gerhold wrote: > Some devices without own memory resources could be placed anywhere in the > device tree but they logically belong to the modem remote processor. Make > it possible to probe them when defined under the mpss device tree node > by calling of_platform_populate(). > This seems reasonable, but other "child devices" of the remoteproc follows the state of the remoteproc instance. So I'm worried that this will create an inconsistency in that assumption. > This can be used for BAM-DMUX for example, which provides the WWAN network > interfaces on some older Qualcomm SoCs such as MSM8916 or MSM8974. > Is there a technical reason for placing the BAM-DMUX within the modem remoteproc node? Can we simply move it to / ? Regards, Bjorn > Signed-off-by: Stephan Gerhold > --- > drivers/remoteproc/qcom_q6v5_mss.c | 7 +++++++ > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/qcom_q6v5_mss.c b/drivers/remoteproc/qcom_q6v5_mss.c > index 43ea8455546c..69f3d1ebf1f1 100644 > --- a/drivers/remoteproc/qcom_q6v5_mss.c > +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/qcom_q6v5_mss.c > @@ -1989,8 +1989,14 @@ static int q6v5_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > if (ret) > goto remove_sysmon_subdev; > > + ret = of_platform_populate(pdev->dev.of_node, NULL, NULL, &pdev->dev); > + if (ret) > + goto remove_rproc; > + > return 0; > > +remove_rproc: > + rproc_del(rproc); > remove_sysmon_subdev: > qcom_remove_sysmon_subdev(qproc->sysmon); > remove_subdevs: > @@ -2010,6 +2016,7 @@ static int q6v5_remove(struct platform_device *pdev) > struct q6v5 *qproc = platform_get_drvdata(pdev); > struct rproc *rproc = qproc->rproc; > > + of_platform_depopulate(&pdev->dev); > rproc_del(rproc); > > qcom_q6v5_deinit(&qproc->q6v5); > -- > 2.34.1 >