From: Martyn Welch <martyn.welch@collabora.com>
To: Beleswar Prasad Padhi <b-padhi@ti.com>,
Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@linaro.org>
Cc: andersson@kernel.org, afd@ti.com, hnagalla@ti.com,
u-kumar1@ti.com, jm@ti.com, jan.kiszka@siemens.com,
christophe.jaillet@wanadoo.fr, jkangas@redhat.com,
eballetbo@redhat.com, linux-remoteproc@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v12 04/36] remoteproc: k3-m4: Don't assert reset in detach routine
Date: Tue, 20 May 2025 10:07:48 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <c746e97a-7792-4dfb-902b-7f1e705cb413@collabora.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <057cffb6-3ff6-4795-8501-7695d7ebc6fa@ti.com>
On 17/05/2025 14:23, Beleswar Prasad Padhi wrote:
>
> On 5/16/2025 9:15 PM, Mathieu Poirier wrote:
>> On Tue, May 13, 2025 at 11:14:38AM +0530, Beleswar Padhi wrote:
>>> The rproc_detach() function invokes __rproc_detach() before
>>> rproc_unprepare_device(). The __rproc_detach() function sets the
>>> rproc->state to "RPROC_DETACHED".
>>>
>>> However, the TI K3 M4 driver erroneously looks for "RPROC_ATTACHED"
>>> state in its .unprepare ops to identify IPC-only mode; which leads to
>>> resetting the rproc in detach routine.
>>>
>>> Therefore, correct the IPC-only mode detection logic to look for
>>> "RPROC_DETACHED" in k3_m4_rproc_unprepare() function.
>>>
>> This driver has been upstream for 9 whole months, it is hard for me to
>> believe
>> this but was just noticed. Martyn from Collabora should be CC'ed on
>> this, and I
>> will also need the required R-b/T-b tags.
>
>
> Cc: Martyn Welch martyn.welch@collabora.com
>
> Requesting Andrew/Judith for review and test too.
>
It's been a while since I used this, IIRC the project I thought we
needed this for went in a different direction almost as soon as I'd
managed to get the driver upstream... ...But I've spent some time to
review as best as I can:
Reviewed-by: Martyn Welch <martyn.welch@collabora.com>
>>
>> Typically bug fixes are not part of refactoring exercises.
>
>
> Typically, yes. But the refactor depends on this fix. This
> k3_m4_rproc_unprepare() function is entirely refactored to common driver
> in [PATCH v12 26/36].
>
> So, If the refactor is picked without this patch fix, the mainline M4
> driver would be fixed, but the older stable kernels would always have
> this bug. Let me know what you think.
>
> Thanks,
> Beleswar
>
>> I suggest to apply
>> this set without this patch - you can then work on fixing this bug.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Mathieu
>>
>>> Fixes: ebcf9008a895 ("remoteproc: k3-m4: Add a remoteproc driver for
>>> M4F subsystem")
>>> Signed-off-by: Beleswar Padhi <b-padhi@ti.com>
>>> ---
>>> v12: Changelog:
>>> 1. New patch. Fixup a state detection logic.
>>>
>>> drivers/remoteproc/ti_k3_m4_remoteproc.c | 2 +-
>>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/ti_k3_m4_remoteproc.c b/drivers/
>>> remoteproc/ti_k3_m4_remoteproc.c
>>> index a16fb165fcedd..6cd50b16a8e82 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/ti_k3_m4_remoteproc.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/ti_k3_m4_remoteproc.c
>>> @@ -228,7 +228,7 @@ static int k3_m4_rproc_unprepare(struct rproc
>>> *rproc)
>>> int ret;
>>> /* If the core is going to be detached do not assert the module
>>> reset */
>>> - if (rproc->state == RPROC_ATTACHED)
>>> + if (rproc->state == RPROC_DETACHED)
>>> return 0;
>>> ret = kproc->ti_sci->ops.dev_ops.put_device(kproc->ti_sci,
>>> --
>>> 2.34.1
>>>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-05-20 9:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 44+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-05-13 5:44 [PATCH v12 00/36] Refactor TI K3 R5, DSP and M4 Remoteproc Drivers Beleswar Padhi
2025-05-13 5:44 ` [PATCH v12 01/36] remoteproc: k3-r5: Drop check performed in k3_r5_rproc_{mbox_callback/kick} Beleswar Padhi
2025-05-13 5:44 ` [PATCH v12 02/36] remoteproc: k3-dsp: Drop check performed in k3_dsp_rproc_{mbox_callback/kick} Beleswar Padhi
2025-05-13 5:44 ` [PATCH v12 03/36] remoteproc: k3-r5: Refactor sequential core power up/down operations Beleswar Padhi
2025-05-13 5:44 ` [PATCH v12 04/36] remoteproc: k3-m4: Don't assert reset in detach routine Beleswar Padhi
2025-05-16 15:45 ` Mathieu Poirier
2025-05-17 13:23 ` Beleswar Prasad Padhi
2025-05-19 14:37 ` Mathieu Poirier
2025-05-20 5:06 ` Beleswar Prasad Padhi
2025-05-20 12:17 ` Hari Nagalla
2025-05-20 9:07 ` Martyn Welch [this message]
2025-05-13 5:44 ` [PATCH v12 05/36] remoteproc: k3-r5: Re-order internal memory initialization functions Beleswar Padhi
2025-05-13 5:44 ` [PATCH v12 06/36] remoteproc: k3-r5: Re-order k3_r5_release_tsp() function Beleswar Padhi
2025-05-13 5:44 ` [PATCH v12 07/36] remoteproc: k3-r5: Refactor Data Structures to Align with DSP and M4 Beleswar Padhi
2025-05-13 5:44 ` [PATCH v12 08/36] remoteproc: k3-r5: Use k3_r5_rproc_mem_data structure for memory info Beleswar Padhi
2025-05-13 5:44 ` [PATCH v12 09/36] remoteproc: k3-{m4/dsp}: Add a void ptr member in rproc internal struct Beleswar Padhi
2025-05-13 5:44 ` [PATCH v12 10/36] remoteproc: k3-m4: Add pointer to rproc struct within k3_m4_rproc Beleswar Padhi
2025-05-13 5:44 ` [PATCH v12 11/36] remoteproc: k3-m4: Use k3_rproc_mem_data structure for memory info Beleswar Padhi
2025-05-13 5:44 ` [PATCH v12 12/36] remoteproc: k3: Refactor shared data structures Beleswar Padhi
2025-05-13 5:44 ` [PATCH v12 13/36] remoteproc: k3: Refactor mailbox rx_callback functions into common driver Beleswar Padhi
2025-05-13 5:44 ` [PATCH v12 14/36] remoteproc: k3: Refactor .kick rproc ops " Beleswar Padhi
2025-05-13 5:44 ` [PATCH v12 15/36] remoteproc: k3-dsp: Correct Reset logic for devices without lresets Beleswar Padhi
2025-05-13 5:44 ` [PATCH v12 16/36] remoteproc: k3-m4: Introduce central function to put rproc into reset Beleswar Padhi
2025-05-13 5:44 ` [PATCH v12 17/36] remoteproc: k3: Refactor rproc_reset() implementation into common driver Beleswar Padhi
2025-05-13 5:44 ` [PATCH v12 18/36] remoteproc: k3-dsp: Correct Reset deassert logic for devices w/o lresets Beleswar Padhi
2025-05-13 5:44 ` [PATCH v12 19/36] remoteproc: k3-m4: Introduce central function to release rproc from reset Beleswar Padhi
2025-05-13 5:44 ` [PATCH v12 20/36] remoteproc: k3: Refactor rproc_release() implementation into common driver Beleswar Padhi
2025-05-13 5:44 ` [PATCH v12 21/36] remoteproc: k3-m4: Ping the mbox while acquiring the channel Beleswar Padhi
2025-05-13 5:44 ` [PATCH v12 22/36] remoteproc: k3: Refactor rproc_request_mbox() implementations into common driver Beleswar Padhi
2025-05-13 5:44 ` [PATCH v12 23/36] remoteproc: k3-dsp: Don't override rproc ops in IPC-only mode Beleswar Padhi
2025-05-13 5:44 ` [PATCH v12 24/36] remoteproc: k3-dsp: Assert local reset during .prepare callback Beleswar Padhi
2025-05-13 5:44 ` [PATCH v12 25/36] remoteproc: k3: Refactor .prepare rproc ops into common driver Beleswar Padhi
2025-05-13 5:45 ` [PATCH v12 26/36] remoteproc: k3: Refactor .unprepare " Beleswar Padhi
2025-05-13 5:45 ` [PATCH v12 27/36] remoteproc: k3: Refactor .start " Beleswar Padhi
2025-05-13 5:45 ` [PATCH v12 28/36] remoteproc: k3: Refactor .stop " Beleswar Padhi
2025-05-13 5:45 ` [PATCH v12 29/36] remoteproc: k3: Refactor .attach " Beleswar Padhi
2025-05-13 5:45 ` [PATCH v12 30/36] remoteproc: k3: Refactor .detach " Beleswar Padhi
2025-05-13 5:45 ` [PATCH v12 31/36] remoteproc: k3: Refactor .get_loaded_rsc_table " Beleswar Padhi
2025-05-13 5:45 ` [PATCH v12 32/36] remoteproc: k3: Refactor .da_to_va rproc " Beleswar Padhi
2025-05-13 5:45 ` [PATCH v12 33/36] remoteproc: k3: Refactor of_get_memories() functions " Beleswar Padhi
2025-05-13 5:45 ` [PATCH v12 34/36] remoteproc: k3: Refactor mem_release() " Beleswar Padhi
2025-05-13 5:45 ` [PATCH v12 35/36] remoteproc: k3: Refactor reserved_mem_init() " Beleswar Padhi
2025-05-13 5:45 ` [PATCH v12 36/36] remoteproc: k3: Refactor release_tsp() " Beleswar Padhi
2025-05-20 17:27 ` [PATCH v12 00/36] Refactor TI K3 R5, DSP and M4 Remoteproc Drivers Mathieu Poirier
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=c746e97a-7792-4dfb-902b-7f1e705cb413@collabora.com \
--to=martyn.welch@collabora.com \
--cc=afd@ti.com \
--cc=andersson@kernel.org \
--cc=b-padhi@ti.com \
--cc=christophe.jaillet@wanadoo.fr \
--cc=eballetbo@redhat.com \
--cc=hnagalla@ti.com \
--cc=jan.kiszka@siemens.com \
--cc=jkangas@redhat.com \
--cc=jm@ti.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-remoteproc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mathieu.poirier@linaro.org \
--cc=u-kumar1@ti.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox