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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.3 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D4557C46475 for ; Wed, 24 Oct 2018 03:19:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C9AC2075D for ; Wed, 24 Oct 2018 03:19:29 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ti.com header.i=@ti.com header.b="RcZQbnDp" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 9C9AC2075D Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=ti.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726857AbeJXLpe (ORCPT ); Wed, 24 Oct 2018 07:45:34 -0400 Received: from fllv0016.ext.ti.com ([198.47.19.142]:41510 "EHLO fllv0016.ext.ti.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725826AbeJXLpe (ORCPT ); Wed, 24 Oct 2018 07:45:34 -0400 Received: from dlelxv90.itg.ti.com ([172.17.2.17]) by fllv0016.ext.ti.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id w9O3JPR6052699; Tue, 23 Oct 2018 22:19:25 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ti.com; s=ti-com-17Q1; t=1540351165; bh=k0v6W428vgBX2ZXX9D1RLCl3m8yyQp154MC69/NUCxs=; h=Subject:To:CC:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To; b=RcZQbnDp2OCh6GUTQbTemKSfntLgl2w9q8GtdA0zzg4qGR4enyKsjM6Lg/LadvHsm 3kDsgxTtI/ILkXD+G33esaj+Flu18TZiLqUnb5JA/m3prXjzEzsexWuvMoSAx2dxFB wyRUQnOaCiYO8P6+cB9YsBwT33lNTMUsMSgF48Wk= Received: from DFLE104.ent.ti.com (dfle104.ent.ti.com [10.64.6.25]) by dlelxv90.itg.ti.com (8.14.3/8.13.8) with ESMTP id w9O3JPOu003309; Tue, 23 Oct 2018 22:19:25 -0500 Received: from DFLE104.ent.ti.com (10.64.6.25) by DFLE104.ent.ti.com (10.64.6.25) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.1466.3; Tue, 23 Oct 2018 22:19:24 -0500 Received: from dflp33.itg.ti.com (10.64.6.16) by DFLE104.ent.ti.com (10.64.6.25) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_0, cipher=TLS_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA) id 15.1.1466.3 via Frontend Transport; Tue, 23 Oct 2018 22:19:24 -0500 Received: from [128.247.58.153] (ileax41-snat.itg.ti.com [10.172.224.153]) by dflp33.itg.ti.com (8.14.3/8.13.8) with ESMTP id w9O3JO23025312; Tue, 23 Oct 2018 22:19:24 -0500 Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 02/17] remoteproc: add rproc_va_to_pa function To: Loic PALLARDY , "bjorn.andersson@linaro.org" , "ohad@wizery.com" CC: "linux-remoteproc@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Arnaud POULIQUEN , "benjamin.gaignard@linaro.org" References: <1532697292-14272-1-git-send-email-loic.pallardy@st.com> <1532697292-14272-3-git-send-email-loic.pallardy@st.com> <91e489e7-86c3-6ee3-918d-151ef1697429@ti.com> <68acbbf905384f6c80b646330a3d1344@SFHDAG7NODE2.st.com> From: Suman Anna Message-ID: <8f19b68f-10f5-b21f-9143-eadb0103999b@ti.com> Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2018 22:19:24 -0500 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.2.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <68acbbf905384f6c80b646330a3d1344@SFHDAG7NODE2.st.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-EXCLAIMER-MD-CONFIG: e1e8a2fd-e40a-4ac6-ac9b-f7e9cc9ee180 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 10/23/18 2:51 PM, Loic PALLARDY wrote: > Hi Suman, > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Suman Anna >> Sent: mardi 23 octobre 2018 18:51 >> To: Loic PALLARDY ; bjorn.andersson@linaro.org; >> ohad@wizery.com >> Cc: linux-remoteproc@vger.kernel.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; >> Arnaud POULIQUEN ; >> benjamin.gaignard@linaro.org >> Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 02/17] remoteproc: add rproc_va_to_pa function >> >> Hi Loic, Bjorn, >> >> On 7/27/18 8:14 AM, Loic Pallardy wrote: >>> This new function translates CPU virtual address in >>> CPU physical one according to virtual address location. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Loic Pallardy >>> Acked-by: Bjorn Andersson >>> --- >>> drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c | 18 +++++++++++++++++- >>> 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c >> b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c >>> index 437fabf..8e5fe1e 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c >>> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c >>> @@ -140,6 +140,22 @@ static void rproc_disable_iommu(struct rproc >> *rproc) >>> iommu_domain_free(domain); >>> } >>> >>> +static phys_addr_t rproc_va_to_pa(void *cpu_addr) >>> +{ >>> + /* >>> + * Return physical address according to virtual address location >>> + * - in vmalloc: if region ioremapped or defined as >> dma_alloc_coherent >>> + * - in kernel: if region allocated in generic dma memory pool >>> + */ >>> + if (is_vmalloc_addr(cpu_addr)) { >>> + return page_to_phys(vmalloc_to_page(cpu_addr)) + >>> + offset_in_page(cpu_addr); >>> + } >>> + >>> + WARN_ON(!virt_addr_valid(cpu_addr)); >>> + return virt_to_phys(cpu_addr); >>> +} >>> + >>> /** >>> * rproc_da_to_va() - lookup the kernel virtual address for a remoteproc >> address >>> * @rproc: handle of a remote processor >>> @@ -711,7 +727,7 @@ static int rproc_handle_carveout(struct rproc >> *rproc, >>> * In this case, the device address and the physical address >>> * are the same. >>> */ >>> - rsc->pa = dma; >>> + rsc->pa = (u32)rproc_va_to_pa(va); >> >> While I agree with the direction here, we ought to add a check here >> warning users if some address bits are getting lost as a result of the >> typecast. Granted the issue may have been present previously with >> dma_addr_t as well, but most platforms were using 32-bit dma addresses, >> so this was kinda masked. There are ARMv7 platforms with LPAE enabled >> allowing physical addresses > 32-bits. >> >> In anycase, we definitely have a need for a v2 for the fw_rsc_carveout >> structure to deal with 64-bit addresses. >> > > Agree with you. > Assumption for this series was to keep resource table as it is. Resource table improvement is planned in a second step. Perhaps, we should add a WARN_ON for the time being until we enhance the resource table for 64-bit platforms/addresses. regards Suman > Regards, > Loic > >> regards >> Suman >> >>> >>> carveout->va = va; >>> carveout->len = rsc->len; >>> >