Re: [PATCHv4 06/14] remoteproc/omap: Initialize and assign reserved memory node

[Suman Anna <s-anna@ti.com>]

On 1/7/20 8:37 AM, Andrew F. Davis wrote:
> On 1/7/20 9:25 AM, Tero Kristo wrote:
>> On 07/01/2020 15:37, Andrew F. Davis wrote:
>>> On 1/2/20 8:18 AM, Tero Kristo wrote:
>>>> From: Suman Anna <s-anna@ti.com>
>>>>
>>>> The reserved memory nodes are not assigned to platform devices by
>>>> default in the driver core to avoid the lookup for every platform
>>>> device and incur a penalty as the real users are expected to be
>>>> only a few devices.
>>>>
>>>> OMAP remoteproc devices fall into the above category and the OMAP
>>>> remoteproc driver _requires_ specific CMA pools to be assigned
>>>> for each device at the moment to align on the location of the
>>>> vrings and vring buffers in the RTOS-side firmware images. So,
>>>
>>>
>>> Requires only at the moment due to firmware..
>>>
>>> This sounds like some firmware images hard-coded their vring addresses
>>> instead of getting them dynamically as they should and we are hacking
>>> around that on the kernel side by giving them the addresses they use as
>>> carveouts.
>>
>> The firmwares are built on specific device addresses, this includes data
>> + code.
>>
>>> Should we rather make use of the IOMMU attached to the DSP to map any
>>> kernel address to the DSP where the firmware expects it? Or better yet
>>> fixup the firmwares.
>>
>> Well, we do use IOMMU to map the corresponding memory area to specific
>> device address. What this patch does, is to allocate a contiguous memory
>> area for the remoteproc shared memories. Using completely random memory
>> location would potentially fragment the remoteproc memory around page
>> boundaries, resulting in a complex (read ineffective) IOMMU mapping.
> 
> 
> Complex is not always ineffective, this is what the (IO)MMUs are for,
> memory gets fragmented on page boundaries, they put it back together,
> that's part of modern computing despite its crazy complexity. Shying
> away from that and just using big static memory carveouts for usecases
> like this (that could otherwise work without them) will not scale.

Not sure what your definition of static carveout is, but we are really
using device-specific CMA pool here, and rely on RSC_CARVEOUTs from the
resource table to allocate the memory from that pool. Obviously, this
cannot be a CMA pool and has to be a static carveout for early-boot
scenarios.

Note that our OMAP IOMMUs are very simple, they only can handle 32-bit
physical addresses, and actually cannot add any memory attributes, and
that is actually handled by another sub-module managed and controlled by
the remote processor. So, this does place some constraints in using a
generic CMA pool.

regards
Suman

> 
> 
>> Also, we are going to need the reserved memory mechanism for the
>> remoteproc anyways later, as we are going to introduce the support for
>> early-boot / late-attach. Bootloader would pass the used memory regions
>> to the kernel via the reserved memory nodes in that case (unless we
>> assume to use some hardcoded region, which would be worse than passing
>> it via DT.)
> 
> 
> This is a different case, I can see a more valid use here (although I'd
> argue passing bootloader generated software configuration like this to
> kernel is a gray area for DT, but I'll leave that for our DT maintainer
> friends).
> 
> At very least can we make the reserved memory node optional here?
> DSP/IPU Firmware can/should be made to work without it.
> 
> Andrew
> 
> 
>>
>> -Tero
>>
>>>
>>> DRAM carveouts should be a last resort used only for when hardware
>>> really requires it.
>>>
>>> Andrew
>>>
>>>
>>>> use the of_reserved_mem_device_init/release() API appropriately
>>>> to assign the corresponding reserved memory region to the OMAP
>>>> remoteproc device. Note that only one region per device is
>>>> allowed by the framework.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Suman Anna <s-anna@ti.com>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Tero Kristo <t-kristo@ti.com>
>>>> Reviewed-by: Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@linaro.org>
>>>> ---
>>>>   drivers/remoteproc/omap_remoteproc.c | 12 +++++++++++-
>>>>   1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/omap_remoteproc.c
>>>> b/drivers/remoteproc/omap_remoteproc.c
>>>> index 9ca337f18ac2..8a6dd742a8b1 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/omap_remoteproc.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/omap_remoteproc.c
>>>> @@ -17,6 +17,7 @@
>>>>   #include <linux/module.h>
>>>>   #include <linux/err.h>
>>>>   #include <linux/of_device.h>
>>>> +#include <linux/of_reserved_mem.h>
>>>>   #include <linux/platform_device.h>
>>>>   #include <linux/dma-mapping.h>
>>>>   #include <linux/remoteproc.h>
>>>> @@ -480,14 +481,22 @@ static int omap_rproc_probe(struct
>>>> platform_device *pdev)
>>>>       if (ret)
>>>>           goto free_rproc;
>>>>   +    ret = of_reserved_mem_device_init(&pdev->dev);
>>>> +    if (ret) {
>>>> +        dev_err(&pdev->dev, "device does not have specific CMA
>>>> pool\n");
>>>> +        goto free_rproc;
>>>> +    }
>>>> +
>>>>       platform_set_drvdata(pdev, rproc);
>>>>         ret = rproc_add(rproc);
>>>>       if (ret)
>>>> -        goto free_rproc;
>>>> +        goto release_mem;
>>>>         return 0;
>>>>   +release_mem:
>>>> +    of_reserved_mem_device_release(&pdev->dev);
>>>>   free_rproc:
>>>>       rproc_free(rproc);
>>>>       return ret;
>>>> @@ -499,6 +508,7 @@ static int omap_rproc_remove(struct
>>>> platform_device *pdev)
>>>>         rproc_del(rproc);
>>>>       rproc_free(rproc);
>>>> +    of_reserved_mem_device_release(&pdev->dev);
>>>>         return 0;
>>>>   }
>>>>
>>
>> -- 
>> Texas Instruments Finland Oy, Porkkalankatu 22, 00180 Helsinki.
>> Y-tunnus/Business ID: 0615521-4. Kotipaikka/Domicile: Helsinki