public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Richard Gong <richard.gong@linux.intel.com>
To: Moritz Fischer <mdf@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-fpga@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	dinguyen@kernel.org, Richard Gong <richard.gong@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv2] fpga: stratix10-soc: remove the pre-set reconfiguration condition
Date: Mon, 1 Jun 2020 09:44:47 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <de692e12-5f50-8235-5af9-2d3f5e659ddb@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200531194927.GA1622@epycbox.lan>

Hi Moritz,


On 5/31/20 2:49 PM, Moritz Fischer wrote:
> On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 08:15:15AM -0500, Richard Gong wrote:
>> Hi Moritz,
>>
>> Sorry for asking.
>>
>> When you get chance, can you review my version 2 patch submitted on
>> 05/15/20?
>>
>> Regards,
>> Richard
>>
>> On 5/15/20 9:35 AM, richard.gong@linux.intel.com wrote:
>>> From: Richard Gong <richard.gong@intel.com>
>>>
>>> The reconfiguration mode is pre-set by driver as the full reconfiguration.
>>> As a result, user have to change code and recompile the drivers if he or
>>> she wants to perform a partial reconfiguration. Removing the pre-set
>>> reconfiguration condition so that user can select full or partial
>>> reconfiguration via overlay device tree without recompiling the drivers.
> 
> Can you help me understand? See comment below, I'm not sure how this
> change changes the behavior.

Flag COMMAND_RECONFIG_FLAG_PARTIAL is defined in Intel service layer 
driver (include/linux/firmware/intel/stratix10-svc-client.h) and the 
default value is zero. It is obvious that COMMAND_RECONFIG_FLAG_PARTIAL 
should be set to 1 to support partial reconfiguration.

Please discard this FPGA patch, I will submit a patch on Intel service 
layer driver.

Regards,
Richard

>>>
>>> Also add an error message if the configuration request is failure.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Richard Gong <richard.gong@intel.com>
>>> ---
>>> v2: define and use constant values
>>> ---
>>>    drivers/fpga/stratix10-soc.c | 9 +++++++--
>>>    1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/fpga/stratix10-soc.c b/drivers/fpga/stratix10-soc.c
>>> index 44b7c56..4d52a80 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/fpga/stratix10-soc.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/fpga/stratix10-soc.c
>>> @@ -14,9 +14,13 @@
>>>    /*
>>>     * FPGA programming requires a higher level of privilege (EL3), per the SoC
>>>     * design.
>>> + * SoC firmware supports full and partial reconfiguration.
> Consider:
> "The SoC firmware supports full and partial reconfiguration."
>>>     */
>>>    #define NUM_SVC_BUFS	4
>>>    #define SVC_BUF_SIZE	SZ_512K
>>> +#define FULL_RECONFIG_FLAG	0
>>> +#define PARTIAL_RECONFIG_FLAG	1
>>> +
>>>    /* Indicates buffer is in use if set */
>>>    #define SVC_BUF_LOCK	0
>>> @@ -182,12 +186,12 @@ static int s10_ops_write_init(struct fpga_manager *mgr,
>>>    	uint i;
>>>    	int ret;
>>> -	ctype.flags = 0;
>>>    	if (info->flags & FPGA_MGR_PARTIAL_RECONFIG) {
>>>    		dev_dbg(dev, "Requesting partial reconfiguration.\n");
>>> -		ctype.flags |= BIT(COMMAND_RECONFIG_FLAG_PARTIAL);
>>> +		ctype.flags = PARTIAL_RECONFIG_FLAG;
>>>    	} else {
>>>    		dev_dbg(dev, "Requesting full reconfiguration.\n");
>>> +		ctype.flags = FULL_RECONFIG_FLAG;
>>>    	}
> Am I missing something here: Doesn't this do the same as before?
> 
> Before:
> If info->flags & FPGA_MGR_PARTIAL_RECONFIG -> ctype.flags = 0 |
> BIT(COMMAND_RECONFIG_FLAG_PARTIAL) -> 1
> and ctype->flags = FULL_RECONFIG -> 0 else.
> 
> Now:
> If info->flags & FPGA_MGR_PARTIAL_RECONFIG -> ctype.flags = PARTIAL_RECONFIG_FLAG -> 1
> ctype->flags = FULL_REECONFIG_FLAG -> 0 else.
> 
> Am I missing something here? If I don't set the flag for partial
> reconfig I'd end up with full reconfiguration in both cases?
> If I do set the flag, I get partial reconfiguration in both cases?
> 
>>>    	reinit_completion(&priv->status_return_completion);
>>> @@ -210,6 +214,7 @@ static int s10_ops_write_init(struct fpga_manager *mgr,
>>>    	ret = 0;
>>>    	if (!test_and_clear_bit(SVC_STATUS_OK, &priv->status)) {
>>> +		dev_err(dev, "RECONFIG_REQUEST failed\n");
>>>    		ret = -ETIMEDOUT;
>>>    		goto init_done;
>>>    	}
>>>
> 
> Thanks,
> Moritz
> 

      reply	other threads:[~2020-06-01 14:29 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-05-15 14:35 [PATCHv2] fpga: stratix10-soc: remove the pre-set reconfiguration condition richard.gong
2020-05-29 13:15 ` Richard Gong
2020-05-29 16:18   ` Russ Weight
2020-05-31 19:49   ` Moritz Fischer
2020-06-01 14:44     ` Richard Gong [this message]

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=de692e12-5f50-8235-5af9-2d3f5e659ddb@linux.intel.com \
    --to=richard.gong@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=dinguyen@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-fpga@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mdf@kernel.org \
    --cc=richard.gong@intel.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