All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@linaro.org>
To: Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@linaro.org>
Cc: ohad@wizery.com, mcoquelin.stm32@gmail.com,
	alexandre.torgue@st.com, loic.pallardy@st.com,
	arnaud.pouliquen@st.com, linux-remoteproc@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-stm32@st-md-mailman.stormreply.com,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 10/12] remoteproc: stm32: Introduce new parse fw ops for synchronisation
Date: Wed, 13 May 2020 22:13:36 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200514051336.GA396285@builder.lan> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200424202505.29562-11-mathieu.poirier@linaro.org>

On Fri 24 Apr 13:25 PDT 2020, Mathieu Poirier wrote:

> Introduce new parse firmware rproc_ops functions to be used when
> synchonising with an MCU.
> 
> Mainly based on the work published by Arnaud Pouliquen [1].
> 
> [1]. https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-remoteproc/list/?series=239877
> 
> Signed-off-by: Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@linaro.org>
> Reviewed-by: Loic Pallardy <loic.pallardy@st.com>
> ---
>  drivers/remoteproc/stm32_rproc.c | 51 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>  1 file changed, 50 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/stm32_rproc.c b/drivers/remoteproc/stm32_rproc.c
> index 86d23c35d805..b8ae8aed5585 100644
> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/stm32_rproc.c
> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/stm32_rproc.c
> @@ -215,7 +215,34 @@ static int stm32_rproc_elf_load_rsc_table(struct rproc *rproc,
>  	return 0;
>  }
>  
> -static int stm32_rproc_parse_fw(struct rproc *rproc, const struct firmware *fw)
> +static int stm32_rproc_sync_elf_load_rsc_table(struct rproc *rproc,
> +					       const struct firmware *fw)
> +{
> +	struct resource_table *table = NULL;
> +	struct stm32_rproc *ddata = rproc->priv;
> +
> +	if (ddata->rsc_va) {

Does it really make sense to try to sync with a remote that doesn't have
a resource table?

> +		table = (struct resource_table *)ddata->rsc_va;
> +		/* Assuming that the resource table fits in 1kB is fair */
> +		rproc->cached_table = kmemdup(table, RSC_TBL_SIZE, GFP_KERNEL);

It's unfortunate that we need to create a clone of the resource table
that we found in ram, and then return the original memory when the core
ask for the loaded table...

I wonder if we somehow can avoid this in the core (i.e. skip overwriting
table_ptr with the cached_table during stop)

> +		if (!rproc->cached_table)
> +			return -ENOMEM;
> +
> +		rproc->table_ptr = rproc->cached_table;
> +		rproc->table_sz = RSC_TBL_SIZE;
> +		return 0;
> +	}
> +
> +	rproc->cached_table = NULL;
> +	rproc->table_ptr = NULL;
> +	rproc->table_sz = 0;
> +
> +	dev_warn(&rproc->dev, "no resource table found for this firmware\n");
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int stm32_rproc_parse_memory_regions(struct rproc *rproc,
> +					    const struct firmware *fw)
>  {
>  	struct device *dev = rproc->dev.parent;
>  	struct device_node *np = dev->of_node;
> @@ -268,9 +295,30 @@ static int stm32_rproc_parse_fw(struct rproc *rproc, const struct firmware *fw)
>  		index++;
>  	}
>  
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int stm32_rproc_parse_fw(struct rproc *rproc, const struct firmware *fw)
> +{
> +	int ret = stm32_rproc_parse_memory_regions(rproc, fw);
> +
> +	if (ret)
> +		return ret;
> +
>  	return stm32_rproc_elf_load_rsc_table(rproc, fw);
>  }
>  
> +static int stm32_rproc_sync_parse_fw(struct rproc *rproc,
> +				     const struct firmware *fw)

Rather than having a function parse_fw that is passed no fw and return
some state that was setup in probe, how about just do this during probe?

Regards,
Bjorn

> +{
> +	int ret = stm32_rproc_parse_memory_regions(rproc, fw);
> +
> +	if (ret)
> +		return ret;
> +
> +	return stm32_rproc_sync_elf_load_rsc_table(rproc, fw);
> +}
> +
>  static irqreturn_t stm32_rproc_wdg(int irq, void *data)
>  {
>  	struct platform_device *pdev = data;
> @@ -544,6 +592,7 @@ static struct rproc_ops st_rproc_ops = {
>  static __maybe_unused struct rproc_ops st_rproc_sync_ops = {
>  	.start		= stm32_rproc_sync_start,
>  	.stop		= stm32_rproc_stop,
> +	.parse_fw       = stm32_rproc_sync_parse_fw,
>  };
>  
>  static const struct of_device_id stm32_rproc_match[] = {
> -- 
> 2.20.1
> 

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@linaro.org>
To: Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@linaro.org>
Cc: ohad@wizery.com, alexandre.torgue@st.com, loic.pallardy@st.com,
	arnaud.pouliquen@st.com, linux-remoteproc@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mcoquelin.stm32@gmail.com,
	linux-stm32@st-md-mailman.stormreply.com,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 10/12] remoteproc: stm32: Introduce new parse fw ops for synchronisation
Date: Wed, 13 May 2020 22:13:36 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200514051336.GA396285@builder.lan> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200424202505.29562-11-mathieu.poirier@linaro.org>

On Fri 24 Apr 13:25 PDT 2020, Mathieu Poirier wrote:

> Introduce new parse firmware rproc_ops functions to be used when
> synchonising with an MCU.
> 
> Mainly based on the work published by Arnaud Pouliquen [1].
> 
> [1]. https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-remoteproc/list/?series=239877
> 
> Signed-off-by: Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@linaro.org>
> Reviewed-by: Loic Pallardy <loic.pallardy@st.com>
> ---
>  drivers/remoteproc/stm32_rproc.c | 51 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>  1 file changed, 50 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/stm32_rproc.c b/drivers/remoteproc/stm32_rproc.c
> index 86d23c35d805..b8ae8aed5585 100644
> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/stm32_rproc.c
> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/stm32_rproc.c
> @@ -215,7 +215,34 @@ static int stm32_rproc_elf_load_rsc_table(struct rproc *rproc,
>  	return 0;
>  }
>  
> -static int stm32_rproc_parse_fw(struct rproc *rproc, const struct firmware *fw)
> +static int stm32_rproc_sync_elf_load_rsc_table(struct rproc *rproc,
> +					       const struct firmware *fw)
> +{
> +	struct resource_table *table = NULL;
> +	struct stm32_rproc *ddata = rproc->priv;
> +
> +	if (ddata->rsc_va) {

Does it really make sense to try to sync with a remote that doesn't have
a resource table?

> +		table = (struct resource_table *)ddata->rsc_va;
> +		/* Assuming that the resource table fits in 1kB is fair */
> +		rproc->cached_table = kmemdup(table, RSC_TBL_SIZE, GFP_KERNEL);

It's unfortunate that we need to create a clone of the resource table
that we found in ram, and then return the original memory when the core
ask for the loaded table...

I wonder if we somehow can avoid this in the core (i.e. skip overwriting
table_ptr with the cached_table during stop)

> +		if (!rproc->cached_table)
> +			return -ENOMEM;
> +
> +		rproc->table_ptr = rproc->cached_table;
> +		rproc->table_sz = RSC_TBL_SIZE;
> +		return 0;
> +	}
> +
> +	rproc->cached_table = NULL;
> +	rproc->table_ptr = NULL;
> +	rproc->table_sz = 0;
> +
> +	dev_warn(&rproc->dev, "no resource table found for this firmware\n");
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int stm32_rproc_parse_memory_regions(struct rproc *rproc,
> +					    const struct firmware *fw)
>  {
>  	struct device *dev = rproc->dev.parent;
>  	struct device_node *np = dev->of_node;
> @@ -268,9 +295,30 @@ static int stm32_rproc_parse_fw(struct rproc *rproc, const struct firmware *fw)
>  		index++;
>  	}
>  
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int stm32_rproc_parse_fw(struct rproc *rproc, const struct firmware *fw)
> +{
> +	int ret = stm32_rproc_parse_memory_regions(rproc, fw);
> +
> +	if (ret)
> +		return ret;
> +
>  	return stm32_rproc_elf_load_rsc_table(rproc, fw);
>  }
>  
> +static int stm32_rproc_sync_parse_fw(struct rproc *rproc,
> +				     const struct firmware *fw)

Rather than having a function parse_fw that is passed no fw and return
some state that was setup in probe, how about just do this during probe?

Regards,
Bjorn

> +{
> +	int ret = stm32_rproc_parse_memory_regions(rproc, fw);
> +
> +	if (ret)
> +		return ret;
> +
> +	return stm32_rproc_sync_elf_load_rsc_table(rproc, fw);
> +}
> +
>  static irqreturn_t stm32_rproc_wdg(int irq, void *data)
>  {
>  	struct platform_device *pdev = data;
> @@ -544,6 +592,7 @@ static struct rproc_ops st_rproc_ops = {
>  static __maybe_unused struct rproc_ops st_rproc_sync_ops = {
>  	.start		= stm32_rproc_sync_start,
>  	.stop		= stm32_rproc_stop,
> +	.parse_fw       = stm32_rproc_sync_parse_fw,
>  };
>  
>  static const struct of_device_id stm32_rproc_match[] = {
> -- 
> 2.20.1
> 

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

  reply	other threads:[~2020-05-14  5:15 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 60+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-04-24 20:24 [PATCH v2 00/12] remoteproc: stm32: Add support for synchronising with M4 Mathieu Poirier
2020-04-24 20:24 ` Mathieu Poirier
2020-04-24 20:24 ` [PATCH v2 01/12] remoteproc: stm32: Decouple rproc from memory translation Mathieu Poirier
2020-04-24 20:24   ` Mathieu Poirier
2020-05-14  4:57   ` Bjorn Andersson
2020-05-14  4:57     ` Bjorn Andersson
2020-04-24 20:24 ` [PATCH v2 02/12] remoteproc: stm32: Request IRQ with platform device Mathieu Poirier
2020-04-24 20:24   ` Mathieu Poirier
2020-05-14  4:57   ` Bjorn Andersson
2020-05-14  4:57     ` Bjorn Andersson
2020-04-24 20:24 ` [PATCH v2 03/12] remoteproc: stm32: Decouple rproc from DT parsing Mathieu Poirier
2020-04-24 20:24   ` Mathieu Poirier
2020-04-29 13:37   ` Arnaud POULIQUEN
2020-04-29 13:37     ` Arnaud POULIQUEN
2020-04-30 20:58     ` Mathieu Poirier
2020-04-30 20:58       ` Mathieu Poirier
2020-05-14  4:59   ` Bjorn Andersson
2020-05-14  4:59     ` Bjorn Andersson
2020-04-24 20:24 ` [PATCH v2 04/12] remoteproc: stm32: Remove memory translation " Mathieu Poirier
2020-04-24 20:24   ` Mathieu Poirier
2020-05-14  5:03   ` Bjorn Andersson
2020-05-14  5:03     ` Bjorn Andersson
2020-04-24 20:24 ` [PATCH v2 05/12] remoteproc: stm32: Parse syscon that will manage M4 synchronisation Mathieu Poirier
2020-04-24 20:24   ` Mathieu Poirier
2020-05-14  5:03   ` Bjorn Andersson
2020-05-14  5:03     ` Bjorn Andersson
2020-04-24 20:24 ` [PATCH v2 06/12] remoteproc: stm32: Get coprocessor state Mathieu Poirier
2020-04-24 20:24   ` Mathieu Poirier
2020-04-29 13:38   ` Arnaud POULIQUEN
2020-04-29 13:38     ` Arnaud POULIQUEN
2020-05-01 17:40     ` Mathieu Poirier
2020-05-01 17:40       ` Mathieu Poirier
2020-04-24 20:25 ` [PATCH v2 07/12] remoteproc: stm32: Get loaded resource table for synchronisation Mathieu Poirier
2020-04-24 20:25   ` Mathieu Poirier
2020-04-24 20:25 ` [PATCH v2 08/12] remoteproc: stm32: Introduce new start ops " Mathieu Poirier
2020-04-24 20:25   ` Mathieu Poirier
2020-04-29 14:50   ` Arnaud POULIQUEN
2020-04-29 14:50     ` Arnaud POULIQUEN
2020-04-24 20:25 ` [PATCH v2 09/12] remoteproc: stm32: Update M4 state in stm32_rproc_stop() Mathieu Poirier
2020-04-24 20:25   ` Mathieu Poirier
2020-04-29 14:52   ` Arnaud POULIQUEN
2020-04-29 14:52     ` Arnaud POULIQUEN
2020-04-24 20:25 ` [PATCH v2 10/12] remoteproc: stm32: Introduce new parse fw ops for synchronisation Mathieu Poirier
2020-04-24 20:25   ` Mathieu Poirier
2020-05-14  5:13   ` Bjorn Andersson [this message]
2020-05-14  5:13     ` Bjorn Andersson
2020-04-24 20:25 ` [PATCH v2 11/12] remoteproc: stm32: Introduce new loaded rsc " Mathieu Poirier
2020-04-24 20:25   ` Mathieu Poirier
2020-05-14  5:15   ` Bjorn Andersson
2020-05-14  5:15     ` Bjorn Andersson
2020-04-24 20:25 ` [PATCH v2 12/12] remoteproc: stm32: Set synchronisation state machine if needed Mathieu Poirier
2020-04-24 20:25   ` Mathieu Poirier
2020-04-29 14:47   ` Arnaud POULIQUEN
2020-04-29 14:47     ` Arnaud POULIQUEN
2020-05-01 17:54     ` Mathieu Poirier
2020-05-01 17:54       ` Mathieu Poirier
2020-04-29 15:08 ` [PATCH v2 00/12] remoteproc: stm32: Add support for synchronising with M4 Arnaud POULIQUEN
2020-04-29 15:08   ` Arnaud POULIQUEN
2020-05-01 17:59   ` Mathieu Poirier
2020-05-01 17:59     ` 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=20200514051336.GA396285@builder.lan \
    --to=bjorn.andersson@linaro.org \
    --cc=alexandre.torgue@st.com \
    --cc=arnaud.pouliquen@st.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-remoteproc@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-stm32@st-md-mailman.stormreply.com \
    --cc=loic.pallardy@st.com \
    --cc=mathieu.poirier@linaro.org \
    --cc=mcoquelin.stm32@gmail.com \
    --cc=ohad@wizery.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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.