[PATCH v5 0/4] Add memory ownership switch support and enable mss rproc on msm8996

[PATCH v5 0/4] Add memory ownership switch support and enable mss rproc on msm8996

[Avaneesh Kumar Dwivedi]

This patch set does following
	1- Adds new scm call which helps in stage two translation of a memory region
	   so that memory ownership sharing and switching can be achieved on armv8 and later.
	2- Enable mss remoteproc on msm8996

Major changes since last patch:
	1- New SCM API now returns effective owner's set for the memory.
	2- Logic to call SCM API to switch ownership of mem region has been changed
           in MSS rproc driver.
	3- proxy and active supply initialization has been left out in case of msm 8996
	4- documentation of the SCM API has been changed as per comment.
	5- logging of fail cases during memory ownership swiitch has been readjusted.
	5- Other indentation and small errors.

Avaneesh Kumar Dwivedi (4):
  firmware: scm: Add new SCM call API for switching memory ownership
  remoteproc: qcom: refactor mss fw image loading sequence
  remoteproc: qcom: Make secure world call for mem ownership switch
  remoteproc: qcom: Add support for mss remoteproc on msm8996

 .../devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/qcom,q6v5.txt   |   1 +
 drivers/firmware/qcom_scm-32.c                     |   6 +
 drivers/firmware/qcom_scm-64.c                     |  27 +++
 drivers/firmware/qcom_scm.c                        |  92 +++++++
 drivers/firmware/qcom_scm.h                        |   5 +
 drivers/remoteproc/qcom_q6v5_pil.c                 | 263 ++++++++++++++++++---
 include/linux/qcom_scm.h                           |  16 ++
 7 files changed, 373 insertions(+), 37 deletions(-)

-- 
Qualcomm India Private Limited, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project.

[PATCH v5 1/4] firmware: scm: Add new SCM call API for switching memory ownership

[Avaneesh Kumar Dwivedi]

Two different processors on a SOC need to switch memory ownership
during load/unload. To enable this, level second memory map table
need to be updated, which is done by secure layer.
This patch add the interface for making secure monitor call for
memory ownership switching request.

Signed-off-by: Avaneesh Kumar Dwivedi <akdwived@codeaurora.org>
---
 drivers/firmware/qcom_scm-32.c |  6 +++
 drivers/firmware/qcom_scm-64.c | 27 +++++++++++++
 drivers/firmware/qcom_scm.c    | 92 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 drivers/firmware/qcom_scm.h    |  5 +++
 include/linux/qcom_scm.h       | 16 ++++++++
 5 files changed, 146 insertions(+)

diff --git a/drivers/firmware/qcom_scm-32.c b/drivers/firmware/qcom_scm-32.c
index 93e3b96..a5e038d 100644
--- a/drivers/firmware/qcom_scm-32.c
+++ b/drivers/firmware/qcom_scm-32.c
@@ -596,3 +596,9 @@ int __qcom_scm_iommu_secure_ptbl_init(struct device *dev, u64 addr, u32 size,
 {
 	return -ENODEV;
 }
+int __qcom_scm_assign_mem(struct device *dev, phys_addr_t mem_region,
+			  size_t mem_sz, phys_addr_t src, size_t src_sz,
+			  phys_addr_t dest, size_t dest_sz)
+{
+	return -ENODEV;
+}
diff --git a/drivers/firmware/qcom_scm-64.c b/drivers/firmware/qcom_scm-64.c
index 6e6d561..cdfe986 100644
--- a/drivers/firmware/qcom_scm-64.c
+++ b/drivers/firmware/qcom_scm-64.c
@@ -439,3 +439,30 @@ int __qcom_scm_iommu_secure_ptbl_init(struct device *dev, u64 addr, u32 size,
 
 	return ret;
 }
+
+int __qcom_scm_assign_mem(struct device *dev, phys_addr_t mem_region,
+			  size_t mem_sz, phys_addr_t src, size_t src_sz,
+			  phys_addr_t dest, size_t dest_sz)
+{
+	int ret;
+	struct qcom_scm_desc desc = {0};
+	struct arm_smccc_res res;
+
+	desc.args[0] = mem_region;
+	desc.args[1] = mem_sz;
+	desc.args[2] = src;
+	desc.args[3] = src_sz;
+	desc.args[4] = dest;
+	desc.args[5] = dest_sz;
+	desc.args[6] = 0;
+
+	desc.arginfo = QCOM_SCM_ARGS(7, QCOM_SCM_RO, QCOM_SCM_VAL,
+				QCOM_SCM_RO, QCOM_SCM_VAL, QCOM_SCM_RO,
+				QCOM_SCM_VAL, QCOM_SCM_VAL);
+
+	ret = qcom_scm_call(dev, QCOM_SCM_SVC_MP,
+				QCOM_MEM_PROT_ASSIGN_ID,
+				&desc, &res);
+
+	return ret ? : res.a1;
+}
diff --git a/drivers/firmware/qcom_scm.c b/drivers/firmware/qcom_scm.c
index bb16510..9da3c6d 100644
--- a/drivers/firmware/qcom_scm.c
+++ b/drivers/firmware/qcom_scm.c
@@ -40,6 +40,18 @@ struct qcom_scm {
 	struct reset_controller_dev reset;
 };
 
+struct qcom_scm_current_perm_info {
+	__le32 vmid;
+	__le32 perm;
+	__le64 ctx;
+	__le32 ctx_size;
+};
+
+struct qcom_scm_mem_map_info {
+	__le64 mem_addr;
+	__le64 mem_size;
+};
+
 static struct qcom_scm *__scm;
 
 static int qcom_scm_clk_enable(void)
@@ -292,6 +304,86 @@ int qcom_scm_pas_shutdown(u32 peripheral)
 }
 EXPORT_SYMBOL(qcom_scm_pas_shutdown);
 
+/**
+ * qcom_scm_assign_mem() - Make a secure call to reassign memory ownership
+ *
+ * @mem_addr: mem region whose ownership need to be reassigned
+ * @mem_sz:   size of the region.
+ * @srcvm:    vmid for current set of owners, each set bit in
+ *            flag indicate a unique owner
+ * @newvm:    array having new owners and corrsponding permission
+ *            flags
+ * @dest_cnt: number of owners in next set.
+ * Return next set of owners on success.
+ */
+int qcom_scm_assign_mem(phys_addr_t mem_addr, size_t mem_sz, int srcvm,
+			struct qcom_scm_vmperm *newvm, int dest_cnt)
+{
+	unsigned long dma_attrs = DMA_ATTR_FORCE_CONTIGUOUS;
+	struct qcom_scm_current_perm_info *destvm;
+	struct qcom_scm_mem_map_info *mem;
+	phys_addr_t memory_phys;
+	phys_addr_t dest_phys;
+	phys_addr_t src_phys;
+	size_t mem_all_sz;
+	size_t memory_sz;
+	size_t dest_sz;
+	size_t src_sz;
+	int next_vm;
+	__le32 *src;
+	void *ptr;
+	int ret;
+	int i;
+
+	src_sz = hweight_long(srcvm)*sizeof(*src);
+	memory_sz = sizeof(*mem);
+	dest_sz = dest_cnt*sizeof(*destvm);
+	mem_all_sz = src_sz + memory_sz + dest_sz;
+
+	ptr = dma_alloc_attrs(__scm->dev, ALIGN(mem_all_sz, SZ_64),
+		&src_phys, GFP_KERNEL, dma_attrs);
+	if (!ptr) {
+		pr_err("mem alloc failed\n");
+		return -ENOMEM;
+	}
+	/* Fill source vmid detail */
+	src = (__le32 *)(ptr);
+	ret = hweight_long(srcvm);
+	for (i = 0; i < ret; i++) {
+		src[i] = cpu_to_le32(ffs(srcvm) - 1);
+		srcvm ^= 1 << (ffs(srcvm) - 1);
+	}
+
+	/* Fill details of mem buff to map */
+	mem = (struct qcom_scm_mem_map_info *)(ptr + ALIGN(src_sz, SZ_64));
+	memory_phys = src_phys + ALIGN(src_sz, SZ_64);
+	mem[0].mem_addr = cpu_to_le64(mem_addr);
+	mem[0].mem_size = cpu_to_le64(mem_sz);
+
+	next_vm = 0;
+	/* Fill details of next vmid detail */
+	destvm = (struct qcom_scm_current_perm_info *)
+			(ptr + ALIGN(memory_sz, SZ_64) + ALIGN(src_sz, SZ_64));
+	dest_phys = memory_phys + ALIGN(memory_sz, SZ_64);
+	for (i = 0; i < dest_cnt; i++) {
+		destvm[i].vmid = cpu_to_le32(newvm[i].vmid);
+		destvm[i].perm = cpu_to_le32(newvm[i].perm);
+		destvm[i].ctx = 0;
+		destvm[i].ctx_size = 0;
+		next_vm |= BIT(newvm[i].vmid);
+	}
+	ret = __qcom_scm_assign_mem(__scm->dev, memory_phys,
+		memory_sz, src_phys, src_sz, dest_phys, dest_sz);
+	dma_free_attrs(__scm->dev, ALIGN(mem_all_sz, SZ_64),
+		ptr, src_phys, dma_attrs);
+	if (ret == 0)
+		return next_vm;
+	else if (ret > 0)
+		return -ret;
+	return ret;
+}
+EXPORT_SYMBOL(qcom_scm_assign_mem);
+
 static int qcom_scm_pas_reset_assert(struct reset_controller_dev *rcdev,
 				     unsigned long idx)
 {
diff --git a/drivers/firmware/qcom_scm.h b/drivers/firmware/qcom_scm.h
index 9bea691..fe54b7b 100644
--- a/drivers/firmware/qcom_scm.h
+++ b/drivers/firmware/qcom_scm.h
@@ -95,5 +95,10 @@ extern int __qcom_scm_iommu_secure_ptbl_size(struct device *dev, u32 spare,
 					     size_t *size);
 extern int __qcom_scm_iommu_secure_ptbl_init(struct device *dev, u64 addr,
 					     u32 size, u32 spare);
+#define QCOM_MEM_PROT_ASSIGN_ID	0x16
+extern int  __qcom_scm_assign_mem(struct device *dev,
+				  phys_addr_t mem_region, size_t mem_sz,
+				  phys_addr_t src, size_t src_sz,
+				  phys_addr_t dest, size_t dest_sz);
 
 #endif
diff --git a/include/linux/qcom_scm.h b/include/linux/qcom_scm.h
index e538047..a9c284d 100644
--- a/include/linux/qcom_scm.h
+++ b/include/linux/qcom_scm.h
@@ -23,6 +23,19 @@ struct qcom_scm_hdcp_req {
 	u32 val;
 };
 
+struct qcom_scm_vmperm {
+	int vmid;
+	int perm;
+};
+
+#define QCOM_SCM_VMID_HLOS       0x3
+#define QCOM_SCM_VMID_MSS_MSA    0xF
+#define QCOM_SCM_PERM_READ       0x4
+#define QCOM_SCM_PERM_WRITE      0x2
+#define QCOM_SCM_PERM_EXEC       0x1
+#define QCOM_SCM_PERM_RW (QCOM_SCM_PERM_READ | QCOM_SCM_PERM_WRITE)
+#define QCOM_SCM_PERM_RWX (QCOM_SCM_PERM_RW | QCOM_SCM_PERM_EXEC)
+
 #if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_QCOM_SCM)
 extern int qcom_scm_set_cold_boot_addr(void *entry, const cpumask_t *cpus);
 extern int qcom_scm_set_warm_boot_addr(void *entry, const cpumask_t *cpus);
@@ -37,6 +50,9 @@ extern int qcom_scm_pas_mem_setup(u32 peripheral, phys_addr_t addr,
 				  phys_addr_t size);
 extern int qcom_scm_pas_auth_and_reset(u32 peripheral);
 extern int qcom_scm_pas_shutdown(u32 peripheral);
+extern int qcom_scm_assign_mem(phys_addr_t mem_addr, size_t mem_sz,
+			       int src, struct qcom_scm_vmperm *newvm,
+			       int dest_cnt);
 extern void qcom_scm_cpu_power_down(u32 flags);
 extern u32 qcom_scm_get_version(void);
 extern int qcom_scm_set_remote_state(u32 state, u32 id);
-- 
Qualcomm India Private Limited, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project.

Re: [PATCH v5 1/4] firmware: scm: Add new SCM call API for switching memory ownership

[Bjorn Andersson]

On Thu 01 Jun 12:17 PDT 2017, Avaneesh Kumar Dwivedi wrote:

> Two different processors on a SOC need to switch memory ownership
> during load/unload. To enable this, level second memory map table
> need to be updated, which is done by secure layer.
> This patch add the interface for making secure monitor call for
> memory ownership switching request.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Avaneesh Kumar Dwivedi <akdwived@codeaurora.org>

Acked-by: Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@linaro.org>

Regards,
Bjorn

Re: [PATCH v5 1/4] firmware: scm: Add new SCM call API for switching memory ownership

[Stephen Boyd]

On 06/02, Avaneesh Kumar Dwivedi wrote:
> Two different processors on a SOC need to switch memory ownership
> during load/unload. To enable this, level second memory map table

second level page tables instead of level second memory map table

> need to be updated, which is done by secure layer.
> This patch add the interface for making secure monitor call for

s/add/adds/

> memory ownership switching request.
> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/qcom_scm.c b/drivers/firmware/qcom_scm.c
> index bb16510..9da3c6d 100644
> --- a/drivers/firmware/qcom_scm.c
> +++ b/drivers/firmware/qcom_scm.c
> @@ -292,6 +304,86 @@ int qcom_scm_pas_shutdown(u32 peripheral)
>  }
>  EXPORT_SYMBOL(qcom_scm_pas_shutdown);
>  
> +/**
> + * qcom_scm_assign_mem() - Make a secure call to reassign memory ownership
> + *
> + * @mem_addr: mem region whose ownership need to be reassigned
> + * @mem_sz:   size of the region.
> + * @srcvm:    vmid for current set of owners, each set bit in
> + *            flag indicate a unique owner
> + * @newvm:    array having new owners and corrsponding permission
> + *            flags
> + * @dest_cnt: number of owners in next set.
> + * Return next set of owners on success.
> + */
> +int qcom_scm_assign_mem(phys_addr_t mem_addr, size_t mem_sz, int srcvm,
> +			struct qcom_scm_vmperm *newvm, int dest_cnt)
> +{
> +	unsigned long dma_attrs = DMA_ATTR_FORCE_CONTIGUOUS;
> +	struct qcom_scm_current_perm_info *destvm;
> +	struct qcom_scm_mem_map_info *mem;
> +	phys_addr_t memory_phys;
> +	phys_addr_t dest_phys;
> +	phys_addr_t src_phys;
> +	size_t mem_all_sz;
> +	size_t memory_sz;
> +	size_t dest_sz;
> +	size_t src_sz;
> +	int next_vm;
> +	__le32 *src;
> +	void *ptr;
> +	int ret;
> +	int i;

Yay reverse christmas tre.

> +
> +	src_sz = hweight_long(srcvm)*sizeof(*src);

Please add space around that '*':

	src_sz = hweight_long(srcvm) * sizeof(*src);

> +	memory_sz = sizeof(*mem);
> +	dest_sz = dest_cnt*sizeof(*destvm);
> +	mem_all_sz = src_sz + memory_sz + dest_sz;
> +
> +	ptr = dma_alloc_attrs(__scm->dev, ALIGN(mem_all_sz, SZ_64),
> +		&src_phys, GFP_KERNEL, dma_attrs);
> +	if (!ptr) {
> +		pr_err("mem alloc failed\n");

We don't want memory allocation failure prints. Please remove.

> +		return -ENOMEM;
> +	}

Newline here!

> +	/* Fill source vmid detail */
> +	src = (__le32 *)(ptr);

Drop useless parenthesis around ptr please.

> +	ret = hweight_long(srcvm);

len = hweight_long(...)?

> +	for (i = 0; i < ret; i++) {

i to ret is really weird looking!

> +		src[i] = cpu_to_le32(ffs(srcvm) - 1);
> +		srcvm ^= 1 << (ffs(srcvm) - 1);
> +	}

What if the loop was written like:

	for_each_set_bit(i, &srcvm, sizeof(srcvm))
		src[i] = cpu_to_le32(i);

I guess srvcm would have to be a long then.

> +
> +	/* Fill details of mem buff to map */
> +	mem = (struct qcom_scm_mem_map_info *)(ptr + ALIGN(src_sz, SZ_64));

Useless cast from void *.

> +	memory_phys = src_phys + ALIGN(src_sz, SZ_64);
> +	mem[0].mem_addr = cpu_to_le64(mem_addr);
> +	mem[0].mem_size = cpu_to_le64(mem_sz);
> +
> +	next_vm = 0;
> +	/* Fill details of next vmid detail */
> +	destvm = (struct qcom_scm_current_perm_info *)
> +			(ptr + ALIGN(memory_sz, SZ_64) + ALIGN(src_sz, SZ_64));

Useless cast from void.

> +	dest_phys = memory_phys + ALIGN(memory_sz, SZ_64);
> +	for (i = 0; i < dest_cnt; i++) {
> +		destvm[i].vmid = cpu_to_le32(newvm[i].vmid);
> +		destvm[i].perm = cpu_to_le32(newvm[i].perm);
> +		destvm[i].ctx = 0;
> +		destvm[i].ctx_size = 0;
> +		next_vm |= BIT(newvm[i].vmid);
> +	}

Newline please!

> +	ret = __qcom_scm_assign_mem(__scm->dev, memory_phys,
> +		memory_sz, src_phys, src_sz, dest_phys, dest_sz);
> +	dma_free_attrs(__scm->dev, ALIGN(mem_all_sz, SZ_64),
> +		ptr, src_phys, dma_attrs);
> +	if (ret == 0)
> +		return next_vm;
> +	else if (ret > 0)
> +		return -ret;

When is ret > 0?

> +	return ret;
> +}
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(qcom_scm_assign_mem);
> +
>  static int qcom_scm_pas_reset_assert(struct reset_controller_dev *rcdev,
>  				     unsigned long idx)
>  {
-- 
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project

Re: [PATCH v5 1/4] firmware: scm: Add new SCM call API for switching memory ownership

[Dwivedi, Avaneesh Kumar (avani)]

On 6/2/2017 11:52 PM, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> On 06/02, Avaneesh Kumar Dwivedi wrote:
>> Two different processors on a SOC need to switch memory ownership
>> during load/unload. To enable this, level second memory map table
> second level page tables instead of level second memory map table
OK
>
>> need to be updated, which is done by secure layer.
>> This patch add the interface for making secure monitor call for
> s/add/adds/
OK.
>
>> memory ownership switching request.
>> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/qcom_scm.c b/drivers/firmware/qcom_scm.c
>> index bb16510..9da3c6d 100644
>> --- a/drivers/firmware/qcom_scm.c
>> +++ b/drivers/firmware/qcom_scm.c
>> @@ -292,6 +304,86 @@ int qcom_scm_pas_shutdown(u32 peripheral)
>>   }
>>   EXPORT_SYMBOL(qcom_scm_pas_shutdown);
>>   
>> +/**
>> + * qcom_scm_assign_mem() - Make a secure call to reassign memory ownership
>> + *
>> + * @mem_addr: mem region whose ownership need to be reassigned
>> + * @mem_sz:   size of the region.
>> + * @srcvm:    vmid for current set of owners, each set bit in
>> + *            flag indicate a unique owner
>> + * @newvm:    array having new owners and corrsponding permission
>> + *            flags
>> + * @dest_cnt: number of owners in next set.
>> + * Return next set of owners on success.
>> + */
>> +int qcom_scm_assign_mem(phys_addr_t mem_addr, size_t mem_sz, int srcvm,
>> +			struct qcom_scm_vmperm *newvm, int dest_cnt)
>> +{
>> +	unsigned long dma_attrs = DMA_ATTR_FORCE_CONTIGUOUS;
>> +	struct qcom_scm_current_perm_info *destvm;
>> +	struct qcom_scm_mem_map_info *mem;
>> +	phys_addr_t memory_phys;
>> +	phys_addr_t dest_phys;
>> +	phys_addr_t src_phys;
>> +	size_t mem_all_sz;
>> +	size_t memory_sz;
>> +	size_t dest_sz;
>> +	size_t src_sz;
>> +	int next_vm;
>> +	__le32 *src;
>> +	void *ptr;
>> +	int ret;
>> +	int i;
> Yay reverse christmas tre.
Shall be reversed?
>
>> +
>> +	src_sz = hweight_long(srcvm)*sizeof(*src);
> Please add space around that '*':
OK
>
> 	src_sz = hweight_long(srcvm) * sizeof(*src);
>
>> +	memory_sz = sizeof(*mem);
>> +	dest_sz = dest_cnt*sizeof(*destvm);
>> +	mem_all_sz = src_sz + memory_sz + dest_sz;
>> +
>> +	ptr = dma_alloc_attrs(__scm->dev, ALIGN(mem_all_sz, SZ_64),
>> +		&src_phys, GFP_KERNEL, dma_attrs);
>> +	if (!ptr) {
>> +		pr_err("mem alloc failed\n");
> We don't want memory allocation failure prints. Please remove.
OK
>
>> +		return -ENOMEM;
>> +	}
> Newline here!
OK
>
>> +	/* Fill source vmid detail */
>> +	src = (__le32 *)(ptr);
> Drop useless parenthesis around ptr please.
OK
>
>> +	ret = hweight_long(srcvm);
> len = hweight_long(...)?
OK, thought to use less local variables. will change
>
>> +	for (i = 0; i < ret; i++) {
> i to ret is really weird looking!
Will check if can use below suggestion
>
>> +		src[i] = cpu_to_le32(ffs(srcvm) - 1);
>> +		srcvm ^= 1 << (ffs(srcvm) - 1);
>> +	}
> What if the loop was written like:
>
> 	for_each_set_bit(i, &srcvm, sizeof(srcvm))
> 		src[i] = cpu_to_le32(i);
>
> I guess srvcm would have to be a long then.
Will check and adopt
>
>> +
>> +	/* Fill details of mem buff to map */
>> +	mem = (struct qcom_scm_mem_map_info *)(ptr + ALIGN(src_sz, SZ_64));
> Useless cast from void *.
OK
>
>> +	memory_phys = src_phys + ALIGN(src_sz, SZ_64);
>> +	mem[0].mem_addr = cpu_to_le64(mem_addr);
>> +	mem[0].mem_size = cpu_to_le64(mem_sz);
>> +
>> +	next_vm = 0;
>> +	/* Fill details of next vmid detail */
>> +	destvm = (struct qcom_scm_current_perm_info *)
>> +			(ptr + ALIGN(memory_sz, SZ_64) + ALIGN(src_sz, SZ_64));
> Useless cast from void.
OK
>> +	dest_phys = memory_phys + ALIGN(memory_sz, SZ_64);
>> +	for (i = 0; i < dest_cnt; i++) {
>> +		destvm[i].vmid = cpu_to_le32(newvm[i].vmid);
>> +		destvm[i].perm = cpu_to_le32(newvm[i].perm);
>> +		destvm[i].ctx = 0;
>> +		destvm[i].ctx_size = 0;
>> +		next_vm |= BIT(newvm[i].vmid);
>> +	}
> Newline please!
OK
>
>> +	ret = __qcom_scm_assign_mem(__scm->dev, memory_phys,
>> +		memory_sz, src_phys, src_sz, dest_phys, dest_sz);
>> +	dma_free_attrs(__scm->dev, ALIGN(mem_all_sz, SZ_64),
>> +		ptr, src_phys, dma_attrs);
>> +	if (ret == 0)
>> +		return next_vm;
>> +	else if (ret > 0)
>> +		return -ret;
> When is ret > 0?
SCM returns positive value in r1 register , and if r1 reg is non zero 
then that should be returned.
Not sure what that indicate.
>
>> +	return ret;
>> +}
>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(qcom_scm_assign_mem);
>> +
>>   static int qcom_scm_pas_reset_assert(struct reset_controller_dev *rcdev,
>>   				     unsigned long idx)
>>   {

-- 
Qualcomm India Private Limited, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project.

[PATCH v5 2/4] remoteproc: qcom: refactor mss fw image loading sequence

[Avaneesh Kumar Dwivedi]

This patch refactor code to first load all firmware blobs
and then update modem proc to authenticate and boot fw.

Signed-off-by: Avaneesh Kumar Dwivedi <akdwived@codeaurora.org>
---
 drivers/remoteproc/qcom_q6v5_pil.c | 19 ++++++++-----------
 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/qcom_q6v5_pil.c b/drivers/remoteproc/qcom_q6v5_pil.c
index 8fd697a..f5f8850 100644
--- a/drivers/remoteproc/qcom_q6v5_pil.c
+++ b/drivers/remoteproc/qcom_q6v5_pil.c
@@ -503,7 +503,7 @@ static int q6v5_mpss_load(struct q6v5 *qproc)
 	bool relocate = false;
 	char seg_name[10];
 	ssize_t offset;
-	size_t size;
+	size_t size = 0;
 	void *ptr;
 	int ret;
 	int i;
@@ -541,7 +541,7 @@ static int q6v5_mpss_load(struct q6v5 *qproc)
 	}
 
 	mpss_reloc = relocate ? min_addr : qproc->mpss_phys;
-
+	/* Load firmware segments */
 	for (i = 0; i < ehdr->e_phnum; i++) {
 		phdr = &phdrs[i];
 
@@ -574,18 +574,15 @@ static int q6v5_mpss_load(struct q6v5 *qproc)
 			memset(ptr + phdr->p_filesz, 0,
 			       phdr->p_memsz - phdr->p_filesz);
 		}
-
-		size = readl(qproc->rmb_base + RMB_PMI_CODE_LENGTH_REG);
-		if (!size) {
-			boot_addr = relocate ? qproc->mpss_phys : min_addr;
-			writel(boot_addr, qproc->rmb_base + RMB_PMI_CODE_START_REG);
-			writel(RMB_CMD_LOAD_READY, qproc->rmb_base + RMB_MBA_COMMAND_REG);
-		}
-
 		size += phdr->p_memsz;
-		writel(size, qproc->rmb_base + RMB_PMI_CODE_LENGTH_REG);
 	}
 
+	/* Transfer ownership of modem ddr region with q6*/
+	boot_addr = relocate ? qproc->mpss_phys : min_addr;
+	writel(boot_addr, qproc->rmb_base + RMB_PMI_CODE_START_REG);
+	writel(RMB_CMD_LOAD_READY, qproc->rmb_base + RMB_MBA_COMMAND_REG);
+	writel(size, qproc->rmb_base + RMB_PMI_CODE_LENGTH_REG);
+
 	ret = q6v5_rmb_mba_wait(qproc, RMB_MBA_AUTH_COMPLETE, 10000);
 	if (ret == -ETIMEDOUT)
 		dev_err(qproc->dev, "MPSS authentication timed out\n");
-- 
Qualcomm India Private Limited, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project.

Re: [PATCH v5 2/4] remoteproc: qcom: refactor mss fw image loading sequence

[Bjorn Andersson]

On Thu 01 Jun 12:17 PDT 2017, Avaneesh Kumar Dwivedi wrote:

> This patch refactor code to first load all firmware blobs
> and then update modem proc to authenticate and boot fw.
> 

This looks good, but I have not had a chance to test this on older
platforms yet.

Acked-by: Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@linaro.org>

Regards,
Bjorn

[PATCH v5 3/4] remoteproc: qcom: Make secure world call for mem ownership switch

[Avaneesh Kumar Dwivedi]

MSS proc on msm8996 can not access fw loaded region without stage
second translation of memory pages where mpss image are loaded.
This patch in order to enable mss boot on msm8996 invoke scm call
to switch or share ownership between apps and modem.

Signed-off-by: Avaneesh Kumar Dwivedi <akdwived@codeaurora.org>
---
 drivers/remoteproc/qcom_q6v5_pil.c | 81 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 79 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/qcom_q6v5_pil.c b/drivers/remoteproc/qcom_q6v5_pil.c
index f5f8850..266efad 100644
--- a/drivers/remoteproc/qcom_q6v5_pil.c
+++ b/drivers/remoteproc/qcom_q6v5_pil.c
@@ -110,6 +110,7 @@ struct rproc_hexagon_res {
 	struct qcom_mss_reg_res *active_supply;
 	char **proxy_clk_names;
 	char **active_clk_names;
+	bool need_mem_protection;
 };
 
 struct q6v5 {
@@ -151,6 +152,7 @@ struct q6v5 {
 	phys_addr_t mpss_reloc;
 	void *mpss_region;
 	size_t mpss_size;
+	bool need_mem_protection;
 
 	struct qcom_rproc_subdev smd_subdev;
 };
@@ -288,6 +290,40 @@ static struct resource_table *q6v5_find_rsc_table(struct rproc *rproc,
 	return &table;
 }
 
+static int q6v5_xfer_mem_ownership(struct q6v5 *qproc,
+				   int image, phys_addr_t addr,
+				   size_t size)
+{
+	static int current_owner[3][1] = {{BIT(QCOM_SCM_VMID_HLOS)},
+			{BIT(QCOM_SCM_VMID_HLOS)},
+			{BIT(QCOM_SCM_VMID_HLOS)} };
+	struct qcom_scm_vmperm next[] = {{0} };
+	int ret;
+
+	if (!qproc->need_mem_protection)
+		return 0;
+
+	if (current_owner[image][0] == BIT(QCOM_SCM_VMID_HLOS)) {
+		next->vmid = QCOM_SCM_VMID_MSS_MSA;
+		next->perm = QCOM_SCM_PERM_RW;
+	} else {
+		next->vmid = QCOM_SCM_VMID_HLOS;
+		next->perm = QCOM_SCM_PERM_RWX;
+	}
+
+	ret = qcom_scm_assign_mem(addr, ALIGN(size, SZ_4K),
+		current_owner[image][0], next, 1);
+	if (ret < 0) {
+		pr_err("Failed to assign %s memory access in range %p to %p ret = %d\n",
+			(image == 0 ? "MDT" : image == 1 ? "MBA" : "MPSS"),
+			(void *)addr, (void *)(addr + size), ret);
+		return ret;
+	}
+
+	current_owner[image][0] = ret;
+	return 0;
+}
+
 static int q6v5_load(struct rproc *rproc, const struct firmware *fw)
 {
 	struct q6v5 *qproc = rproc->priv;
@@ -450,6 +486,7 @@ static int q6v5_mpss_init_image(struct q6v5 *qproc, const struct firmware *fw)
 {
 	unsigned long dma_attrs = DMA_ATTR_FORCE_CONTIGUOUS;
 	dma_addr_t phys;
+	int xferop_ret;
 	void *ptr;
 	int ret;
 
@@ -461,6 +498,10 @@ static int q6v5_mpss_init_image(struct q6v5 *qproc, const struct firmware *fw)
 
 	memcpy(ptr, fw->data, fw->size);
 
+	/* Hypervisor mapping to access metadata by modem */
+	ret = q6v5_xfer_mem_ownership(qproc, 0, phys, fw->size);
+	if (ret)
+		return -EAGAIN;
 	writel(phys, qproc->rmb_base + RMB_PMI_META_DATA_REG);
 	writel(RMB_CMD_META_DATA_READY, qproc->rmb_base + RMB_MBA_COMMAND_REG);
 
@@ -470,6 +511,11 @@ static int q6v5_mpss_init_image(struct q6v5 *qproc, const struct firmware *fw)
 	else if (ret < 0)
 		dev_err(qproc->dev, "MPSS header authentication failed: %d\n", ret);
 
+	/* Metadata authentication done, remove modem access */
+	xferop_ret = q6v5_xfer_mem_ownership(qproc, 0, phys, fw->size);
+	if (xferop_ret)
+		dev_warn(qproc->dev,
+			"mdt buffer not reclaimed system may become unstable\n");
 	dma_free_attrs(qproc->dev, fw->size, ptr, phys, dma_attrs);
 
 	return ret < 0 ? ret : 0;
@@ -579,6 +625,10 @@ static int q6v5_mpss_load(struct q6v5 *qproc)
 
 	/* Transfer ownership of modem ddr region with q6*/
 	boot_addr = relocate ? qproc->mpss_phys : min_addr;
+	ret = q6v5_xfer_mem_ownership(qproc, 2,
+		qproc->mpss_phys, qproc->mpss_size);
+	if (ret)
+		return -EAGAIN;
 	writel(boot_addr, qproc->rmb_base + RMB_PMI_CODE_START_REG);
 	writel(RMB_CMD_LOAD_READY, qproc->rmb_base + RMB_MBA_COMMAND_REG);
 	writel(size, qproc->rmb_base + RMB_PMI_CODE_LENGTH_REG);
@@ -598,6 +648,7 @@ static int q6v5_mpss_load(struct q6v5 *qproc)
 static int q6v5_start(struct rproc *rproc)
 {
 	struct q6v5 *qproc = (struct q6v5 *)rproc->priv;
+	int xfermemop_ret;
 	int ret;
 
 	ret = q6v5_regulator_enable(qproc, qproc->proxy_regs,
@@ -633,6 +684,11 @@ static int q6v5_start(struct rproc *rproc)
 		goto assert_reset;
 	}
 
+	/* Assign MBA image access in DDR to q6 */
+	xfermemop_ret = q6v5_xfer_mem_ownership(qproc, 1,
+				qproc->mba_phys, qproc->mba_size);
+	if (xfermemop_ret)
+		goto assert_reset;
 	writel(qproc->mba_phys, qproc->rmb_base + RMB_MBA_IMAGE_REG);
 
 	ret = q6v5proc_reset(qproc);
@@ -654,16 +710,21 @@ static int q6v5_start(struct rproc *rproc)
 
 	ret = q6v5_mpss_load(qproc);
 	if (ret)
-		goto halt_axi_ports;
+		goto reclaim_mem;
 
 	ret = wait_for_completion_timeout(&qproc->start_done,
 					  msecs_to_jiffies(5000));
 	if (ret == 0) {
 		dev_err(qproc->dev, "start timed out\n");
 		ret = -ETIMEDOUT;
-		goto halt_axi_ports;
+		goto reclaim_mem;
 	}
 
+	xfermemop_ret = q6v5_xfer_mem_ownership(qproc, 1,
+				qproc->mba_phys, qproc->mba_size);
+	if (xfermemop_ret)
+		dev_err(qproc->dev,
+			"Failed to reclaim mba buffer system may become unstable\n");
 	qproc->running = true;
 
 	q6v5_clk_disable(qproc->dev, qproc->proxy_clks,
@@ -673,12 +734,21 @@ static int q6v5_start(struct rproc *rproc)
 
 	return 0;
 
+reclaim_mem:
+	xfermemop_ret = q6v5_xfer_mem_ownership(qproc, 2,
+				qproc->mpss_phys, qproc->mpss_size);
+	WARN_ON(xfermemop_ret);
 halt_axi_ports:
 	q6v5proc_halt_axi_port(qproc, qproc->halt_map, qproc->halt_q6);
 	q6v5proc_halt_axi_port(qproc, qproc->halt_map, qproc->halt_modem);
 	q6v5proc_halt_axi_port(qproc, qproc->halt_map, qproc->halt_nc);
 	q6v5_clk_disable(qproc->dev, qproc->active_clks,
 			 qproc->active_clk_count);
+	xfermemop_ret = q6v5_xfer_mem_ownership(qproc, 1,
+				qproc->mba_phys, qproc->mba_size);
+	if (xfermemop_ret)
+		dev_err(qproc->dev, "Failed to reclaim mba buffer, system may become unstable\n");
+
 assert_reset:
 	reset_control_assert(qproc->mss_restart);
 disable_vdd:
@@ -698,6 +768,7 @@ static int q6v5_stop(struct rproc *rproc)
 {
 	struct q6v5 *qproc = (struct q6v5 *)rproc->priv;
 	int ret;
+	u32 val;
 
 	qproc->running = false;
 
@@ -715,6 +786,9 @@ static int q6v5_stop(struct rproc *rproc)
 	q6v5proc_halt_axi_port(qproc, qproc->halt_map, qproc->halt_modem);
 	q6v5proc_halt_axi_port(qproc, qproc->halt_map, qproc->halt_nc);
 
+	ret = q6v5_xfer_mem_ownership(qproc, 2,
+		qproc->mpss_phys, qproc->mpss_size);
+	WARN_ON(ret);
 	reset_control_assert(qproc->mss_restart);
 	q6v5_clk_disable(qproc->dev, qproc->active_clks,
 			 qproc->active_clk_count);
@@ -1012,6 +1086,7 @@ static int q6v5_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
 	if (ret)
 		goto free_rproc;
 
+	qproc->need_mem_protection = desc->need_mem_protection;
 	ret = q6v5_request_irq(qproc, pdev, "wdog", q6v5_wdog_interrupt);
 	if (ret < 0)
 		goto free_rproc;
@@ -1087,6 +1162,7 @@ static int q6v5_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
 		"mem",
 		NULL
 	},
+	.need_mem_protection = false,
 };
 
 static const struct rproc_hexagon_res msm8974_mss = {
@@ -1124,6 +1200,7 @@ static int q6v5_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
 		"mem",
 		NULL
 	},
+	.need_mem_protection = false,
 };
 
 static const struct of_device_id q6v5_of_match[] = {
-- 
Qualcomm India Private Limited, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project.

Re: [PATCH v5 3/4] remoteproc: qcom: Make secure world call for mem ownership switch

[Bjorn Andersson]

On Thu 01 Jun 12:17 PDT 2017, Avaneesh Kumar Dwivedi wrote:

> MSS proc on msm8996 can not access fw loaded region without stage
> second translation of memory pages where mpss image are loaded.
> This patch in order to enable mss boot on msm8996 invoke scm call
> to switch or share ownership between apps and modem.
> 

Overall this looks good now, I have two minor notes that I want you to
fix up though.

> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/qcom_q6v5_pil.c b/drivers/remoteproc/qcom_q6v5_pil.c
> @@ -288,6 +290,40 @@ static struct resource_table *q6v5_find_rsc_table(struct rproc *rproc,
>  	return &table;
>  }
>  
> +static int q6v5_xfer_mem_ownership(struct q6v5 *qproc,
> +				   int image, phys_addr_t addr,

Rather than relying on a static int to keep track of current permissions
pass a "int *current_perms", that you update on success.

Add int mba_perm and int mpss_perm to the struct q6v5 and initialize
them in probe and just keep the metadata_perm on the stack in
q6v5_mpss_init_image.

> +				   size_t size)
> +{
> +	static int current_owner[3][1] = {{BIT(QCOM_SCM_VMID_HLOS)},
> +			{BIT(QCOM_SCM_VMID_HLOS)},
> +			{BIT(QCOM_SCM_VMID_HLOS)} };
> +	struct qcom_scm_vmperm next[] = {{0} };

You don't need to initialize this, and if you just keep it "struct
qcom_scm_vmperm next" you can pass it as &next in the
qcom_scm_assign_mem() call.

> +	int ret;
> +
> +	if (!qproc->need_mem_protection)
> +		return 0;
> +
> +	if (current_owner[image][0] == BIT(QCOM_SCM_VMID_HLOS)) {

And rather than making this flip back and forth with every call, I think
it's more robust if you pass the new expected owner as a parameter to
the function. Simplest way I can think of it to add a "bool
remote_owner" as a parameter; it makes the changes minimal and works
with the naming of the function.

> +		next->vmid = QCOM_SCM_VMID_MSS_MSA;
> +		next->perm = QCOM_SCM_PERM_RW;
> +	} else {
> +		next->vmid = QCOM_SCM_VMID_HLOS;
> +		next->perm = QCOM_SCM_PERM_RWX;
> +	}
> +
> +	ret = qcom_scm_assign_mem(addr, ALIGN(size, SZ_4K),
> +		current_owner[image][0], next, 1);
> +	if (ret < 0) {
> +		pr_err("Failed to assign %s memory access in range %p to %p ret = %d\n",
> +			(image == 0 ? "MDT" : image == 1 ? "MBA" : "MPSS"),
> +			(void *)addr, (void *)(addr + size), ret);
> +		return ret;
> +	}
> +
> +	current_owner[image][0] = ret;
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +

Regards,
Bjorn

Re: [PATCH v5 3/4] remoteproc: qcom: Make secure world call for mem ownership switch

[Dwivedi, Avaneesh Kumar (avani)]

Hi Bjorn,

Thanks lot many for such a blazing fast response :)

regarding your points.

a- Do you mean caller's of q6v5_xfer_mem_ownership() should pass two 
additional inputs i.e. *next_perm and *next_vmid

     and that based on successful return of qcom_scm_assign () they 
should be treated as *current_perm and *current_vmid

    by caller? if so caller will have to do flipping between MSS and 
HLOS, isn't it?

    Also code churning will increase this way, and also logging the way 
is being handled now may require to change again.

    or am i misunderstanding your proposal?

    Sorry for inconvenience, but if you could through little more light, 
that will help.


-Avaneesh


On 6/2/2017 2:12 AM, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
> On Thu 01 Jun 12:17 PDT 2017, Avaneesh Kumar Dwivedi wrote:
>
>> MSS proc on msm8996 can not access fw loaded region without stage
>> second translation of memory pages where mpss image are loaded.
>> This patch in order to enable mss boot on msm8996 invoke scm call
>> to switch or share ownership between apps and modem.
>>
> Overall this looks good now, I have two minor notes that I want you to
> fix up though.
>
>> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/qcom_q6v5_pil.c b/drivers/remoteproc/qcom_q6v5_pil.c
>> @@ -288,6 +290,40 @@ static struct resource_table *q6v5_find_rsc_table(struct rproc *rproc,
>>   	return &table;
>>   }
>>   
>> +static int q6v5_xfer_mem_ownership(struct q6v5 *qproc,
>> +				   int image, phys_addr_t addr,
> Rather than relying on a static int to keep track of current permissions
> pass a "int *current_perms", that you update on success.
>
> Add int mba_perm and int mpss_perm to the struct q6v5 and initialize
> them in probe and just keep the metadata_perm on the stack in
> q6v5_mpss_init_image.
>
>> +				   size_t size)
>> +{
>> +	static int current_owner[3][1] = {{BIT(QCOM_SCM_VMID_HLOS)},
>> +			{BIT(QCOM_SCM_VMID_HLOS)},
>> +			{BIT(QCOM_SCM_VMID_HLOS)} };
>> +	struct qcom_scm_vmperm next[] = {{0} };
> You don't need to initialize this, and if you just keep it "struct
> qcom_scm_vmperm next" you can pass it as &next in the
> qcom_scm_assign_mem() call.
>
>> +	int ret;
>> +
>> +	if (!qproc->need_mem_protection)
>> +		return 0;
>> +
>> +	if (current_owner[image][0] == BIT(QCOM_SCM_VMID_HLOS)) {
> And rather than making this flip back and forth with every call, I think
> it's more robust if you pass the new expected owner as a parameter to
> the function. Simplest way I can think of it to add a "bool
> remote_owner" as a parameter; it makes the changes minimal and works
> with the naming of the function.
>
>> +		next->vmid = QCOM_SCM_VMID_MSS_MSA;
>> +		next->perm = QCOM_SCM_PERM_RW;
>> +	} else {
>> +		next->vmid = QCOM_SCM_VMID_HLOS;
>> +		next->perm = QCOM_SCM_PERM_RWX;
>> +	}
>> +
>> +	ret = qcom_scm_assign_mem(addr, ALIGN(size, SZ_4K),
>> +		current_owner[image][0], next, 1);
>> +	if (ret < 0) {
>> +		pr_err("Failed to assign %s memory access in range %p to %p ret = %d\n",
>> +			(image == 0 ? "MDT" : image == 1 ? "MBA" : "MPSS"),
>> +			(void *)addr, (void *)(addr + size), ret);
>> +		return ret;
>> +	}
>> +
>> +	current_owner[image][0] = ret;
>> +	return 0;
>> +}
>> +
> Regards,
> Bjorn
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arm-msm" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

-- 
Qualcomm India Private Limited, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project.

Re: [PATCH v5 3/4] remoteproc: qcom: Make secure world call for mem ownership switch

[Bjorn Andersson]

On Thu 01 Jun 14:42 PDT 2017, Dwivedi, Avaneesh Kumar (avani) wrote:

> Hi Bjorn,
> 
> Thanks lot many for such a blazing fast response :)
> 
> regarding your points.
> 
> a- Do you mean caller's of q6v5_xfer_mem_ownership() should pass two
> additional inputs i.e. *next_perm and *next_vmid
> 

You have two cases; assign to HLOS and assign to MSS, so I imagine that
you pass a single indicator of which you want to assign. I.e. rather
than looking at what the current state is and flipping you pass the
conditional of that if statement as a parameter.

>     and that based on successful return of qcom_scm_assign () they should be
> treated as *current_perm and *current_vmid
> 

Instead of your index, you take a "int *curr_perms", which you use as
the current vmid list and you assign at the end of the function (like
you do today).

So to transfer the ownership to the MSS you would make a function call
like:

ret = q6v5_xfer_mem_ownership(qproc, &qproc->mpss_owner, ..., true);

mpss_owner would have to be initialize to HLOS before calling this, but
will always be holding the current value.

>    by caller? if so caller will have to do flipping between MSS and HLOS,
> isn't it?
> 

As far as I can see each call to this driver is either a "transfer to
MSS" or "transfer to HLOS", so that shouldn't be a problem.

>    Also code churning will increase this way, and also logging the way is
> being handled now may require to change again.
> 
>    or am i misunderstanding your proposal?
> 

Could be that I'm missing something, if above doesn't make sense please
do let me know.

>    Sorry for inconvenience, but if you could through little more light, that
> will help.
> 

There's no inconvenience, thanks for reaching out for clarifications on
my comments.

Regards,
Bjorn

> 
> -Avaneesh
> 
> 
> On 6/2/2017 2:12 AM, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
> > On Thu 01 Jun 12:17 PDT 2017, Avaneesh Kumar Dwivedi wrote:
> > 
> > > MSS proc on msm8996 can not access fw loaded region without stage
> > > second translation of memory pages where mpss image are loaded.
> > > This patch in order to enable mss boot on msm8996 invoke scm call
> > > to switch or share ownership between apps and modem.
> > > 
> > Overall this looks good now, I have two minor notes that I want you to
> > fix up though.
> > 
> > > diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/qcom_q6v5_pil.c b/drivers/remoteproc/qcom_q6v5_pil.c
> > > @@ -288,6 +290,40 @@ static struct resource_table *q6v5_find_rsc_table(struct rproc *rproc,
> > >   	return &table;
> > >   }
> > > +static int q6v5_xfer_mem_ownership(struct q6v5 *qproc,
> > > +				   int image, phys_addr_t addr,
> > Rather than relying on a static int to keep track of current permissions
> > pass a "int *current_perms", that you update on success.
> > 
> > Add int mba_perm and int mpss_perm to the struct q6v5 and initialize
> > them in probe and just keep the metadata_perm on the stack in
> > q6v5_mpss_init_image.
> > 
> > > +				   size_t size)
> > > +{
> > > +	static int current_owner[3][1] = {{BIT(QCOM_SCM_VMID_HLOS)},
> > > +			{BIT(QCOM_SCM_VMID_HLOS)},
> > > +			{BIT(QCOM_SCM_VMID_HLOS)} };
> > > +	struct qcom_scm_vmperm next[] = {{0} };
> > You don't need to initialize this, and if you just keep it "struct
> > qcom_scm_vmperm next" you can pass it as &next in the
> > qcom_scm_assign_mem() call.
> > 
> > > +	int ret;
> > > +
> > > +	if (!qproc->need_mem_protection)
> > > +		return 0;
> > > +
> > > +	if (current_owner[image][0] == BIT(QCOM_SCM_VMID_HLOS)) {
> > And rather than making this flip back and forth with every call, I think
> > it's more robust if you pass the new expected owner as a parameter to
> > the function. Simplest way I can think of it to add a "bool
> > remote_owner" as a parameter; it makes the changes minimal and works
> > with the naming of the function.
> > 
> > > +		next->vmid = QCOM_SCM_VMID_MSS_MSA;
> > > +		next->perm = QCOM_SCM_PERM_RW;
> > > +	} else {
> > > +		next->vmid = QCOM_SCM_VMID_HLOS;
> > > +		next->perm = QCOM_SCM_PERM_RWX;
> > > +	}
> > > +
> > > +	ret = qcom_scm_assign_mem(addr, ALIGN(size, SZ_4K),
> > > +		current_owner[image][0], next, 1);
> > > +	if (ret < 0) {
> > > +		pr_err("Failed to assign %s memory access in range %p to %p ret = %d\n",
> > > +			(image == 0 ? "MDT" : image == 1 ? "MBA" : "MPSS"),
> > > +			(void *)addr, (void *)(addr + size), ret);
> > > +		return ret;
> > > +	}
> > > +
> > > +	current_owner[image][0] = ret;
> > > +	return 0;
> > > +}
> > > +
> > Regards,
> > Bjorn
> > --
> > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arm-msm" in
> > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> > More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> 
> -- 
> Qualcomm India Private Limited, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum,
> a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project.
> 

Re: [PATCH v5 3/4] remoteproc: qcom: Make secure world call for mem ownership switch

[Dwivedi, Avaneesh Kumar (avani)]

On 6/2/2017 11:25 PM, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
> On Thu 01 Jun 14:42 PDT 2017, Dwivedi, Avaneesh Kumar (avani) wrote:
>
>> Hi Bjorn,
>>
>> Thanks lot many for such a blazing fast response :)
>>
>> regarding your points.
>>
>> a- Do you mean caller's of q6v5_xfer_mem_ownership() should pass two
>> additional inputs i.e. *next_perm and *next_vmid
>>
> You have two cases; assign to HLOS and assign to MSS, so I imagine that
> you pass a single indicator of which you want to assign. I.e. rather
> than looking at what the current state is and flipping you pass the
> conditional of that if statement as a parameter.
OK
>
>>      and that based on successful return of qcom_scm_assign () they should be
>> treated as *current_perm and *current_vmid
>>
> Instead of your index, you take a "int *curr_perms", which you use as
> the current vmid list and you assign at the end of the function (like
> you do today).
>
> So to transfer the ownership to the MSS you would make a function call
> like:
>
> ret = q6v5_xfer_mem_ownership(qproc, &qproc->mpss_owner, ..., true);
>
> mpss_owner would have to be initialize to HLOS before calling this, but
> will always be holding the current value.
i am not finding compelling enough region to carry an input pointer to 
hold current ownership
specially when i am carrying a boolean flag to check whether next->vmid 
will be MSS or HLOS
I mean where am i going to use this current owner info in mss rproc 
driver, i am yet not getting enough reason.
while the local array did job of maintaining and flipping the ownership 
based on info if which image ownership transfer is being called.

>
>>     by caller? if so caller will have to do flipping between MSS and HLOS,
>> isn't it?
>>
> As far as I can see each call to this driver is either a "transfer to
> MSS" or "transfer to HLOS", so that shouldn't be a problem.
Yes this job will be done by bool flag, but again what is then use of 
carry pointers  mpss_owner, mba_owner.
>
>>     Also code churning will increase this way, and also logging the way is
>> being handled now may require to change again.
>>
>>     or am i misunderstanding your proposal?
>>
> Could be that I'm missing something, if above doesn't make sense please
> do let me know.
I can not say it does not make sense, probably something subtle i am 
missing to see.
>
>>     Sorry for inconvenience, but if you could through little more light, that
>> will help.
>>
> There's no inconvenience, thanks for reaching out for clarifications on
> my comments.
Thanks for such a nice gesture.

i feel that maintaining the local array for ownership switching looks, 
too raw way of doing something.
may be i can improve that, but  first i need to get understanding of 
your vision in suggesting above changes.
>
> Regards,
> Bjorn
>
>> -Avaneesh
>>
>>
>> On 6/2/2017 2:12 AM, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
>>> On Thu 01 Jun 12:17 PDT 2017, Avaneesh Kumar Dwivedi wrote:
>>>
>>>> MSS proc on msm8996 can not access fw loaded region without stage
>>>> second translation of memory pages where mpss image are loaded.
>>>> This patch in order to enable mss boot on msm8996 invoke scm call
>>>> to switch or share ownership between apps and modem.
>>>>
>>> Overall this looks good now, I have two minor notes that I want you to
>>> fix up though.
>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/qcom_q6v5_pil.c b/drivers/remoteproc/qcom_q6v5_pil.c
>>>> @@ -288,6 +290,40 @@ static struct resource_table *q6v5_find_rsc_table(struct rproc *rproc,
>>>>    	return &table;
>>>>    }
>>>> +static int q6v5_xfer_mem_ownership(struct q6v5 *qproc,
>>>> +				   int image, phys_addr_t addr,
>>> Rather than relying on a static int to keep track of current permissions
>>> pass a "int *current_perms", that you update on success.
>>>
>>> Add int mba_perm and int mpss_perm to the struct q6v5 and initialize
>>> them in probe and just keep the metadata_perm on the stack in
>>> q6v5_mpss_init_image.
>>>
>>>> +				   size_t size)
>>>> +{
>>>> +	static int current_owner[3][1] = {{BIT(QCOM_SCM_VMID_HLOS)},
>>>> +			{BIT(QCOM_SCM_VMID_HLOS)},
>>>> +			{BIT(QCOM_SCM_VMID_HLOS)} };
>>>> +	struct qcom_scm_vmperm next[] = {{0} };
>>> You don't need to initialize this, and if you just keep it "struct
>>> qcom_scm_vmperm next" you can pass it as &next in the
>>> qcom_scm_assign_mem() call.
>>>
>>>> +	int ret;
>>>> +
>>>> +	if (!qproc->need_mem_protection)
>>>> +		return 0;
>>>> +
>>>> +	if (current_owner[image][0] == BIT(QCOM_SCM_VMID_HLOS)) {
>>> And rather than making this flip back and forth with every call, I think
>>> it's more robust if you pass the new expected owner as a parameter to
>>> the function. Simplest way I can think of it to add a "bool
>>> remote_owner" as a parameter; it makes the changes minimal and works
>>> with the naming of the function.
>>>
>>>> +		next->vmid = QCOM_SCM_VMID_MSS_MSA;
>>>> +		next->perm = QCOM_SCM_PERM_RW;
>>>> +	} else {
>>>> +		next->vmid = QCOM_SCM_VMID_HLOS;
>>>> +		next->perm = QCOM_SCM_PERM_RWX;
>>>> +	}
>>>> +
>>>> +	ret = qcom_scm_assign_mem(addr, ALIGN(size, SZ_4K),
>>>> +		current_owner[image][0], next, 1);
>>>> +	if (ret < 0) {
>>>> +		pr_err("Failed to assign %s memory access in range %p to %p ret = %d\n",
>>>> +			(image == 0 ? "MDT" : image == 1 ? "MBA" : "MPSS"),
>>>> +			(void *)addr, (void *)(addr + size), ret);
>>>> +		return ret;
>>>> +	}
>>>> +
>>>> +	current_owner[image][0] = ret;
>>>> +	return 0;
>>>> +}
>>>> +
>>> Regards,
>>> Bjorn
>>> --
>>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arm-msm" in
>>> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
>>> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>> -- 
>> Qualcomm India Private Limited, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum,
>> a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project.
>>

-- 
Qualcomm India Private Limited, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project.

Re: [PATCH v5 3/4] remoteproc: qcom: Make secure world call for mem ownership switch

[Bjorn Andersson]

On Wed 07 Jun 09:27 PDT 2017, Dwivedi, Avaneesh Kumar (avani) wrote:

> 
> 
> On 6/2/2017 11:25 PM, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
> > On Thu 01 Jun 14:42 PDT 2017, Dwivedi, Avaneesh Kumar (avani) wrote:
> > 
> > > Hi Bjorn,
> > > 
> > > Thanks lot many for such a blazing fast response :)
> > > 
> > > regarding your points.
> > > 
> > > a- Do you mean caller's of q6v5_xfer_mem_ownership() should pass two
> > > additional inputs i.e. *next_perm and *next_vmid
> > > 
> > You have two cases; assign to HLOS and assign to MSS, so I imagine that
> > you pass a single indicator of which you want to assign. I.e. rather
> > than looking at what the current state is and flipping you pass the
> > conditional of that if statement as a parameter.
> OK
> > 
> > >      and that based on successful return of qcom_scm_assign () they should be
> > > treated as *current_perm and *current_vmid
> > > 
> > Instead of your index, you take a "int *curr_perms", which you use as
> > the current vmid list and you assign at the end of the function (like
> > you do today).
> > 
> > So to transfer the ownership to the MSS you would make a function call
> > like:
> > 
> > ret = q6v5_xfer_mem_ownership(qproc, &qproc->mpss_owner, ..., true);
> > 
> > mpss_owner would have to be initialize to HLOS before calling this, but
> > will always be holding the current value.
> i am not finding compelling enough region to carry an input pointer to hold
> current ownership
> specially when i am carrying a boolean flag to check whether next->vmid will
> be MSS or HLOS
> I mean where am i going to use this current owner info in mss rproc driver,
> i am yet not getting enough reason.
> while the local array did job of maintaining and flipping the ownership
> based on info if which image ownership transfer is being called.
> 

As far as I can see your patch works fine, every code path will end up
calling xfer_mem() an even number of times, meaning that when we're done
the ownership is on the HLOS side.

But the reason I don't like this flip-flop mechanism is that it forces
us to _always_ exit every code path with an even number of calls.
Meaning that if we ever refactor any of this code and accidentally add
another flip, we will start seeing "random" crashes. This is the reason
why I want the code to be explicit in "transfer permission to X".

The reason for not using the "destination owner" for figuring out the
current owner is that in the even that you call "transfer permission to
HLOS" twice in a row, you will call TZ saying that the current ownership
is MSS and the call will fail. In this case the calling code has no
chance to know if we failed because we have called xfer_mem() an odd
number of times or something else and although we are good (HLOS is
owner) we have to treat this as a fatal error.


So, it's all about future maintainability - not about it currently
working.

Regards,
Bjorn

[PATCH v5 4/4] remoteproc: qcom: Add support for mss remoteproc on msm8996

[Avaneesh Kumar Dwivedi]

This patch add support for mss boot on msm8996. Major changes
include initializing mss rproc for msm8996, making appropriate
change for executing mss reset sequence etc.

Signed-off-by: Avaneesh Kumar Dwivedi <akdwived@codeaurora.org>
---
 .../devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/qcom,q6v5.txt   |   1 +
 drivers/remoteproc/qcom_q6v5_pil.c                 | 163 ++++++++++++++++++---
 2 files changed, 140 insertions(+), 24 deletions(-)

diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/qcom,q6v5.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/qcom,q6v5.txt
index 92347fe..87a8e51 100644
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/qcom,q6v5.txt
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/qcom,q6v5.txt
@@ -11,6 +11,7 @@ on the Qualcomm Hexagon core.
 		    "qcom,msm8916-mss-pil",
 		    "qcom,msm8974-mss-pil"
 
+		    "qcom,msm8996-mss-pil"
 - reg:
 	Usage: required
 	Value type: <prop-encoded-array>
diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/qcom_q6v5_pil.c b/drivers/remoteproc/qcom_q6v5_pil.c
index 266efad..6f53b6d 100644
--- a/drivers/remoteproc/qcom_q6v5_pil.c
+++ b/drivers/remoteproc/qcom_q6v5_pil.c
@@ -32,6 +32,7 @@
 #include <linux/soc/qcom/mdt_loader.h>
 #include <linux/soc/qcom/smem.h>
 #include <linux/soc/qcom/smem_state.h>
+#include <linux/iopoll.h>
 
 #include "remoteproc_internal.h"
 #include "qcom_common.h"
@@ -64,6 +65,8 @@
 #define QDSP6SS_RESET_REG		0x014
 #define QDSP6SS_GFMUX_CTL_REG		0x020
 #define QDSP6SS_PWR_CTL_REG		0x030
+#define QDSP6SS_MEM_PWR_CTL		0x0B0
+#define QDSP6SS_STRAP_ACC		0x110
 
 /* AXI Halt Register Offsets */
 #define AXI_HALTREQ_REG			0x0
@@ -92,6 +95,15 @@
 #define QDSS_BHS_ON			BIT(21)
 #define QDSS_LDO_BYP			BIT(22)
 
+/* QDSP6v56 parameters */
+#define QDSP6v56_LDO_BYP		BIT(25)
+#define QDSP6v56_BHS_ON		BIT(24)
+#define QDSP6v56_CLAMP_WL		BIT(21)
+#define QDSP6v56_CLAMP_QMC_MEM		BIT(22)
+#define HALT_CHECK_MAX_LOOPS		200
+#define QDSP6SS_XO_CBCR		0x0038
+#define QDSP6SS_ACC_OVERRIDE_VAL		0x20
+
 struct reg_info {
 	struct regulator *reg;
 	int uV;
@@ -110,6 +122,7 @@ struct rproc_hexagon_res {
 	struct qcom_mss_reg_res *active_supply;
 	char **proxy_clk_names;
 	char **active_clk_names;
+	int version;
 	bool need_mem_protection;
 };
 
@@ -155,6 +168,13 @@ struct q6v5 {
 	bool need_mem_protection;
 
 	struct qcom_rproc_subdev smd_subdev;
+	int version;
+};
+
+enum {
+	MSS_MSM8916,
+	MSS_MSM8974,
+	MSS_MSM8996,
 };
 
 static int q6v5_regulator_init(struct device *dev, struct reg_info *regs,
@@ -388,33 +408,97 @@ static int q6v5proc_reset(struct q6v5 *qproc)
 {
 	u32 val;
 	int ret;
+	int i;
 
-	/* Assert resets, stop core */
-	val = readl(qproc->reg_base + QDSP6SS_RESET_REG);
-	val |= (Q6SS_CORE_ARES | Q6SS_BUS_ARES_ENABLE | Q6SS_STOP_CORE);
-	writel(val, qproc->reg_base + QDSP6SS_RESET_REG);
 
-	/* Enable power block headswitch, and wait for it to stabilize */
-	val = readl(qproc->reg_base + QDSP6SS_PWR_CTL_REG);
-	val |= QDSS_BHS_ON | QDSS_LDO_BYP;
-	writel(val, qproc->reg_base + QDSP6SS_PWR_CTL_REG);
-	udelay(1);
-
-	/*
-	 * Turn on memories. L2 banks should be done individually
-	 * to minimize inrush current.
-	 */
-	val = readl(qproc->reg_base + QDSP6SS_PWR_CTL_REG);
-	val |= Q6SS_SLP_RET_N | Q6SS_L2TAG_SLP_NRET_N |
-		Q6SS_ETB_SLP_NRET_N | Q6SS_L2DATA_STBY_N;
-	writel(val, qproc->reg_base + QDSP6SS_PWR_CTL_REG);
-	val |= Q6SS_L2DATA_SLP_NRET_N_2;
-	writel(val, qproc->reg_base + QDSP6SS_PWR_CTL_REG);
-	val |= Q6SS_L2DATA_SLP_NRET_N_1;
-	writel(val, qproc->reg_base + QDSP6SS_PWR_CTL_REG);
-	val |= Q6SS_L2DATA_SLP_NRET_N_0;
-	writel(val, qproc->reg_base + QDSP6SS_PWR_CTL_REG);
+	if (qproc->version == MSS_MSM8996) {
+		/* Override the ACC value if required */
+		writel(QDSP6SS_ACC_OVERRIDE_VAL,
+			qproc->reg_base + QDSP6SS_STRAP_ACC);
+
+		/* Assert resets, stop core */
+		val = readl(qproc->reg_base + QDSP6SS_RESET_REG);
+		val |= Q6SS_CORE_ARES | Q6SS_BUS_ARES_ENABLE | Q6SS_STOP_CORE;
+		writel(val, qproc->reg_base + QDSP6SS_RESET_REG);
+
+		/* BHS require xo cbcr to be enabled */
+		val = readl(qproc->reg_base + QDSP6SS_XO_CBCR);
+		val |= 0x1;
+		writel(val, qproc->reg_base + QDSP6SS_XO_CBCR);
 
+		/* Read CLKOFF bit to go low indicating CLK is enabled */
+		ret = readl_poll_timeout(qproc->reg_base + QDSP6SS_XO_CBCR,
+				val, !(val & BIT(31)), 1, HALT_CHECK_MAX_LOOPS);
+		if (ret) {
+			dev_err(qproc->dev,
+				"xo cbcr enabling timed out (rc:%d)\n", ret);
+			return ret;
+		}
+		/* Enable power block headswitch and wait for it to stabilize */
+		val = readl(qproc->reg_base + QDSP6SS_PWR_CTL_REG);
+		val |= QDSP6v56_BHS_ON;
+		writel(val, qproc->reg_base + QDSP6SS_PWR_CTL_REG);
+		val |= readl(qproc->reg_base + QDSP6SS_PWR_CTL_REG);
+		udelay(1);
+
+		/* Put LDO in bypass mode */
+		val |= QDSP6v56_LDO_BYP;
+		writel(val, qproc->reg_base + QDSP6SS_PWR_CTL_REG);
+
+		/* Deassert QDSP6 compiler memory clamp */
+		val = readl(qproc->reg_base + QDSP6SS_PWR_CTL_REG);
+		val &= ~QDSP6v56_CLAMP_QMC_MEM;
+		writel(val, qproc->reg_base + QDSP6SS_PWR_CTL_REG);
+
+		/* Deassert memory peripheral sleep and L2 memory standby */
+		val |= Q6SS_L2DATA_STBY_N | Q6SS_SLP_RET_N;
+		writel(val, qproc->reg_base + QDSP6SS_PWR_CTL_REG);
+
+		/* Turn on L1, L2, ETB and JU memories 1 at a time */
+		val = readl(qproc->reg_base + QDSP6SS_MEM_PWR_CTL);
+		for (i = 19; i >= 0; i--) {
+			val |= BIT(i);
+			writel(val, qproc->reg_base +
+						QDSP6SS_MEM_PWR_CTL);
+			/*
+			 * Read back value to ensure the write is done then
+			 * wait for 1us for both memory peripheral and data
+			 * array to turn on.
+			 */
+			val |= readl(qproc->reg_base + QDSP6SS_MEM_PWR_CTL);
+			udelay(1);
+		}
+		/* Remove word line clamp */
+		val = readl(qproc->reg_base + QDSP6SS_PWR_CTL_REG);
+		val &= ~QDSP6v56_CLAMP_WL;
+		writel(val, qproc->reg_base + QDSP6SS_PWR_CTL_REG);
+	} else {
+		/* Assert resets, stop core */
+		val = readl(qproc->reg_base + QDSP6SS_RESET_REG);
+		val |= Q6SS_CORE_ARES | Q6SS_BUS_ARES_ENABLE | Q6SS_STOP_CORE;
+		writel(val, qproc->reg_base + QDSP6SS_RESET_REG);
+
+		/* Enable power block headswitch and wait for it to stabilize */
+		val = readl(qproc->reg_base + QDSP6SS_PWR_CTL_REG);
+		val |= QDSS_BHS_ON | QDSS_LDO_BYP;
+		writel(val, qproc->reg_base + QDSP6SS_PWR_CTL_REG);
+		val |= readl(qproc->reg_base + QDSP6SS_PWR_CTL_REG);
+		udelay(1);
+		/*
+		 * Turn on memories. L2 banks should be done individually
+		 * to minimize inrush current.
+		 */
+		val = readl(qproc->reg_base + QDSP6SS_PWR_CTL_REG);
+		val |= Q6SS_SLP_RET_N | Q6SS_L2TAG_SLP_NRET_N |
+			Q6SS_ETB_SLP_NRET_N | Q6SS_L2DATA_STBY_N;
+		writel(val, qproc->reg_base + QDSP6SS_PWR_CTL_REG);
+		val |= Q6SS_L2DATA_SLP_NRET_N_2;
+		writel(val, qproc->reg_base + QDSP6SS_PWR_CTL_REG);
+		val |= Q6SS_L2DATA_SLP_NRET_N_1;
+		writel(val, qproc->reg_base + QDSP6SS_PWR_CTL_REG);
+		val |= Q6SS_L2DATA_SLP_NRET_N_0;
+		writel(val, qproc->reg_base + QDSP6SS_PWR_CTL_REG);
+	}
 	/* Remove IO clamp */
 	val &= ~Q6SS_CLAMP_IO;
 	writel(val, qproc->reg_base + QDSP6SS_PWR_CTL_REG);
@@ -786,6 +870,15 @@ static int q6v5_stop(struct rproc *rproc)
 	q6v5proc_halt_axi_port(qproc, qproc->halt_map, qproc->halt_modem);
 	q6v5proc_halt_axi_port(qproc, qproc->halt_map, qproc->halt_nc);
 
+	if (qproc->version == MSS_MSM8996) {
+		/*
+		 * To avoid high MX current during LPASS/MSS restart.
+		 */
+		val = readl(qproc->reg_base + QDSP6SS_PWR_CTL_REG);
+		val |= Q6SS_CLAMP_IO | QDSP6v56_CLAMP_WL |
+			QDSP6v56_CLAMP_QMC_MEM;
+		writel(val, qproc->reg_base + QDSP6SS_PWR_CTL_REG);
+	}
 	ret = q6v5_xfer_mem_ownership(qproc, 2,
 		qproc->mpss_phys, qproc->mpss_size);
 	WARN_ON(ret);
@@ -1086,6 +1179,7 @@ static int q6v5_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
 	if (ret)
 		goto free_rproc;
 
+	qproc->version = desc->version;
 	qproc->need_mem_protection = desc->need_mem_protection;
 	ret = q6v5_request_irq(qproc, pdev, "wdog", q6v5_wdog_interrupt);
 	if (ret < 0)
@@ -1135,6 +1229,24 @@ static int q6v5_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
 	return 0;
 }
 
+static const struct rproc_hexagon_res msm8996_mss = {
+	.hexagon_mba_image = "mba.mbn",
+	.proxy_clk_names = (char*[]){
+			"xo",
+			"pnoc",
+			NULL
+	},
+	.active_clk_names = (char*[]){
+			"iface",
+			"bus",
+			"mem",
+			"gpll0_mss_clk",
+			NULL
+	},
+	.need_mem_protection = true,
+	.version = MSS_MSM8996,
+};
+
 static const struct rproc_hexagon_res msm8916_mss = {
 	.hexagon_mba_image = "mba.mbn",
 	.proxy_supply = (struct qcom_mss_reg_res[]) {
@@ -1163,6 +1275,7 @@ static int q6v5_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
 		NULL
 	},
 	.need_mem_protection = false,
+	.version = MSS_MSM8916,
 };
 
 static const struct rproc_hexagon_res msm8974_mss = {
@@ -1201,12 +1314,14 @@ static int q6v5_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
 		NULL
 	},
 	.need_mem_protection = false,
+	.version = MSS_MSM8974,
 };
 
 static const struct of_device_id q6v5_of_match[] = {
 	{ .compatible = "qcom,q6v5-pil", .data = &msm8916_mss},
 	{ .compatible = "qcom,msm8916-mss-pil", .data = &msm8916_mss},
 	{ .compatible = "qcom,msm8974-mss-pil", .data = &msm8974_mss},
+	{ .compatible = "qcom,msm8996-mss-pil", .data = &msm8996_mss},
 	{ },
 };
 MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, q6v5_of_match);
-- 
Qualcomm India Private Limited, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project.

Re: [PATCH v5 4/4] remoteproc: qcom: Add support for mss remoteproc on msm8996

[Bjorn Andersson]

On Thu 01 Jun 12:17 PDT 2017, Avaneesh Kumar Dwivedi wrote:

> This patch add support for mss boot on msm8996. Major changes
> include initializing mss rproc for msm8996, making appropriate
> change for executing mss reset sequence etc.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Avaneesh Kumar Dwivedi <akdwived@codeaurora.org>
> ---
>  .../devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/qcom,q6v5.txt   |   1 +
>  drivers/remoteproc/qcom_q6v5_pil.c                 | 163 ++++++++++++++++++---
>  2 files changed, 140 insertions(+), 24 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/qcom,q6v5.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/qcom,q6v5.txt
> index 92347fe..87a8e51 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/qcom,q6v5.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/qcom,q6v5.txt
> @@ -11,6 +11,7 @@ on the Qualcomm Hexagon core.
>  		    "qcom,msm8916-mss-pil",
>  		    "qcom,msm8974-mss-pil"

This blank line should be moved one step down.

> +		    "qcom,msm8996-mss-pil"
>  - reg:
>  	Usage: required
>  	Value type: <prop-encoded-array>

Apart from that I think this looks good.

Acked-by: Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@linaro.org>

Regards,
Bjorn