All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [PATCH v2 0/2] TI K3 R5F remoteproc support on AM64x SoCs
@ 2021-03-27 14:31 ` Suman Anna
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: Suman Anna @ 2021-03-27 14:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Bjorn Andersson, Mathieu Poirier, Rob Herring
  Cc: Lokesh Vutla, linux-remoteproc, devicetree, linux-arm-kernel,
	linux-kernel, Suman Anna

Hi All,

The following series is a minor revision of the K3 R5F remoteproc AM64x
support series [1] addressing one review comment from Mathieu. Please
see the v1 cover-letter for details about the revised R5F IP in TI AM64x
SoCs. 

Only change is in Patch 2, binding patch is unchanged from v1. Also,
corrected the AM46x typo in the cover-letter title :)

regards
Suman

[1] https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-remoteproc/cover/20210318215842.8196-1-s-anna@ti.com/

Suman Anna (2):
  dt-bindings: remoteproc: k3-r5f: Update bindings for AM64x SoCs
  remoteproc: k3-r5: Extend support to R5F clusters on AM64x SoCs

 .../bindings/remoteproc/ti,k3-r5f-rproc.yaml  |  31 +++-
 drivers/remoteproc/ti_k3_r5_remoteproc.c      | 149 ++++++++++++++----
 2 files changed, 146 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-)

-- 
2.30.1


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v2 0/2] TI K3 R5F remoteproc support on AM64x SoCs
@ 2021-03-27 14:31 ` Suman Anna
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: Suman Anna @ 2021-03-27 14:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Bjorn Andersson, Mathieu Poirier, Rob Herring
  Cc: devicetree, Lokesh Vutla, linux-remoteproc, linux-kernel,
	linux-arm-kernel

Hi All,

The following series is a minor revision of the K3 R5F remoteproc AM64x
support series [1] addressing one review comment from Mathieu. Please
see the v1 cover-letter for details about the revised R5F IP in TI AM64x
SoCs. 

Only change is in Patch 2, binding patch is unchanged from v1. Also,
corrected the AM46x typo in the cover-letter title :)

regards
Suman

[1] https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-remoteproc/cover/20210318215842.8196-1-s-anna@ti.com/

Suman Anna (2):
  dt-bindings: remoteproc: k3-r5f: Update bindings for AM64x SoCs
  remoteproc: k3-r5: Extend support to R5F clusters on AM64x SoCs

 .../bindings/remoteproc/ti,k3-r5f-rproc.yaml  |  31 +++-
 drivers/remoteproc/ti_k3_r5_remoteproc.c      | 149 ++++++++++++++----
 2 files changed, 146 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-)

-- 
2.30.1


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

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v2 1/2] dt-bindings: remoteproc: k3-r5f: Update bindings for AM64x SoCs
  2021-03-27 14:31 ` Suman Anna
@ 2021-03-27 14:31   ` Suman Anna
  -1 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: Suman Anna @ 2021-03-27 14:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Bjorn Andersson, Mathieu Poirier, Rob Herring
  Cc: Lokesh Vutla, linux-remoteproc, devicetree, linux-arm-kernel,
	linux-kernel, Suman Anna

The K3 AM64x SoCs have two dual-core Arm R5F clusters/subsystems, with
2 R5F cores each, both in the MAIN voltage domain.

These clusters are a revised IP version compared to those present on
J721E and J7200 SoCs, and supports a new "Single-CPU" mode instead of
LockStep mode. Update the K3 R5F remoteproc bindings with the compatible
info relevant to these R5F clusters/subsystems on K3 AM64x SoCs.

Signed-off-by: Suman Anna <s-anna@ti.com>
---
v2: No changes

 .../bindings/remoteproc/ti,k3-r5f-rproc.yaml  | 31 ++++++++++++++++---
 1 file changed, 26 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/ti,k3-r5f-rproc.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/ti,k3-r5f-rproc.yaml
index d905d614502b..130fbaacc4b1 100644
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/ti,k3-r5f-rproc.yaml
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/ti,k3-r5f-rproc.yaml
@@ -14,8 +14,12 @@ description: |
   processor subsystems/clusters (R5FSS). The dual core cluster can be used
   either in a LockStep mode providing safety/fault tolerance features or in a
   Split mode providing two individual compute cores for doubling the compute
-  capacity. These are used together with other processors present on the SoC
-  to achieve various system level goals.
+  capacity on most SoCs. These are used together with other processors present
+  on the SoC to achieve various system level goals.
+
+  AM64x SoCs do not support LockStep mode, but rather a new non-safety mode
+  called "Single-CPU" mode, where only Core0 is used, but with ability to use
+  Core1's TCMs as well.
 
   Each Dual-Core R5F sub-system is represented as a single DTS node
   representing the cluster, with a pair of child DT nodes representing
@@ -33,6 +37,7 @@ properties:
       - ti,am654-r5fss
       - ti,j721e-r5fss
       - ti,j7200-r5fss
+      - ti,am64-r5fss
 
   power-domains:
     description: |
@@ -56,11 +61,12 @@ properties:
 
   ti,cluster-mode:
     $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/uint32
-    enum: [0, 1]
     description: |
       Configuration Mode for the Dual R5F cores within the R5F cluster.
-      Should be either a value of 1 (LockStep mode) or 0 (Split mode),
-      default is LockStep mode if omitted.
+      Should be either a value of 1 (LockStep mode) or 0 (Split mode) on
+      most SoCs (AM65x, J721E, J7200), default is LockStep mode if omitted;
+      and should be either a value of 0 (Split mode) or 2 (Single-CPU mode)
+      on AM64x SoCs, default is Split mode if omitted.
 
 # R5F Processor Child Nodes:
 # ==========================
@@ -97,6 +103,7 @@ patternProperties:
           - ti,am654-r5f
           - ti,j721e-r5f
           - ti,j7200-r5f
+          - ti,am64-r5f
 
       reg:
         items:
@@ -198,6 +205,20 @@ patternProperties:
 
     unevaluatedProperties: false
 
+if:
+  properties:
+    compatible:
+      enum:
+        - ti,am64-r5fss
+then:
+  properties:
+    ti,cluster-mode:
+      enum: [0, 2]
+else:
+  properties:
+    ti,cluster-mode:
+      enum: [0, 1]
+
 required:
   - compatible
   - power-domains
-- 
2.30.1


^ permalink raw reply related	[flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v2 1/2] dt-bindings: remoteproc: k3-r5f: Update bindings for AM64x SoCs
@ 2021-03-27 14:31   ` Suman Anna
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: Suman Anna @ 2021-03-27 14:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Bjorn Andersson, Mathieu Poirier, Rob Herring
  Cc: devicetree, Lokesh Vutla, linux-remoteproc, linux-kernel,
	linux-arm-kernel

The K3 AM64x SoCs have two dual-core Arm R5F clusters/subsystems, with
2 R5F cores each, both in the MAIN voltage domain.

These clusters are a revised IP version compared to those present on
J721E and J7200 SoCs, and supports a new "Single-CPU" mode instead of
LockStep mode. Update the K3 R5F remoteproc bindings with the compatible
info relevant to these R5F clusters/subsystems on K3 AM64x SoCs.

Signed-off-by: Suman Anna <s-anna@ti.com>
---
v2: No changes

 .../bindings/remoteproc/ti,k3-r5f-rproc.yaml  | 31 ++++++++++++++++---
 1 file changed, 26 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/ti,k3-r5f-rproc.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/ti,k3-r5f-rproc.yaml
index d905d614502b..130fbaacc4b1 100644
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/ti,k3-r5f-rproc.yaml
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/ti,k3-r5f-rproc.yaml
@@ -14,8 +14,12 @@ description: |
   processor subsystems/clusters (R5FSS). The dual core cluster can be used
   either in a LockStep mode providing safety/fault tolerance features or in a
   Split mode providing two individual compute cores for doubling the compute
-  capacity. These are used together with other processors present on the SoC
-  to achieve various system level goals.
+  capacity on most SoCs. These are used together with other processors present
+  on the SoC to achieve various system level goals.
+
+  AM64x SoCs do not support LockStep mode, but rather a new non-safety mode
+  called "Single-CPU" mode, where only Core0 is used, but with ability to use
+  Core1's TCMs as well.
 
   Each Dual-Core R5F sub-system is represented as a single DTS node
   representing the cluster, with a pair of child DT nodes representing
@@ -33,6 +37,7 @@ properties:
       - ti,am654-r5fss
       - ti,j721e-r5fss
       - ti,j7200-r5fss
+      - ti,am64-r5fss
 
   power-domains:
     description: |
@@ -56,11 +61,12 @@ properties:
 
   ti,cluster-mode:
     $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/uint32
-    enum: [0, 1]
     description: |
       Configuration Mode for the Dual R5F cores within the R5F cluster.
-      Should be either a value of 1 (LockStep mode) or 0 (Split mode),
-      default is LockStep mode if omitted.
+      Should be either a value of 1 (LockStep mode) or 0 (Split mode) on
+      most SoCs (AM65x, J721E, J7200), default is LockStep mode if omitted;
+      and should be either a value of 0 (Split mode) or 2 (Single-CPU mode)
+      on AM64x SoCs, default is Split mode if omitted.
 
 # R5F Processor Child Nodes:
 # ==========================
@@ -97,6 +103,7 @@ patternProperties:
           - ti,am654-r5f
           - ti,j721e-r5f
           - ti,j7200-r5f
+          - ti,am64-r5f
 
       reg:
         items:
@@ -198,6 +205,20 @@ patternProperties:
 
     unevaluatedProperties: false
 
+if:
+  properties:
+    compatible:
+      enum:
+        - ti,am64-r5fss
+then:
+  properties:
+    ti,cluster-mode:
+      enum: [0, 2]
+else:
+  properties:
+    ti,cluster-mode:
+      enum: [0, 1]
+
 required:
   - compatible
   - power-domains
-- 
2.30.1


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

^ permalink raw reply related	[flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v2 2/2] remoteproc: k3-r5: Extend support to R5F clusters on AM64x SoCs
  2021-03-27 14:31 ` Suman Anna
@ 2021-03-27 14:31   ` Suman Anna
  -1 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: Suman Anna @ 2021-03-27 14:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Bjorn Andersson, Mathieu Poirier, Rob Herring
  Cc: Lokesh Vutla, linux-remoteproc, devicetree, linux-arm-kernel,
	linux-kernel, Suman Anna

The K3 AM64x SoC family has a revised R5F sub-system and contains a
subset of the R5F clusters present on J721E SoCs. The K3 AM64x SoCs
only have two dual-core Arm R5F clusters/subsystems with 2 R5F cores
each present within the MAIN voltage domain (MAIN_R5FSS0 & MAIN_R5FSS1).

The revised IP has the following distinct features:
 1. The R5FSS IP supports a new "Single-CPU" mode instead of the LockStep
    mode on existing SoCs (AM65x, J721E or J7200). This mode is similar
    to LockStep-mode on J7200 SoCs in terms of TCM usage without the
    fault-tolerant safety feature provided by the LockStep mode.

    The Core1 TCMs are combined with the Core0 TCMs effectively doubling
    the amount of TCMs available in Single-CPU mode. The LockStep-mode
    on previous AM65x and J721E SoCs could only use the Core0 TCMs. These
    combined TCMs appear contiguous at the respective Core0 TCM addresses.
    The code though is executed only on a single CPU (on Core0), and as
    such, requires the halt signal to be programmed only for Core0, while
    the resets need to be managed for both the cores.

 2. TCMs are auto-initialized during module power-up, and the behavior
    is programmable through a MMR bit. This feature is the same as on
    the recent J7200 SoCs.

Extend the support to these clusters in the K3 R5F remoteproc driver
using AM64x specific compatibles. New TI-SCI flags and a unique cluster
mode are also needed for the cluster mode detection on these SoCs. The
reset assert and deassert sequence of both the cores in Single-CPU mode
is agnostic of the order, so the same LockStep reset and release sequences
are re-used.

The integration of these clusters is very much similar to existing SoCs
otherwise.

Signed-off-by: Suman Anna <s-anna@ti.com>
---
v2: 
 - Address a minor comment from Mathieu to drop the unnecessary hunk 
   double-checking the dt ti,cluster-mode values in k3_r5_probe()
v1: https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-remoteproc/patch/20210318215842.8196-3-s-anna@ti.com/

 drivers/remoteproc/ti_k3_r5_remoteproc.c | 149 ++++++++++++++++++-----
 1 file changed, 120 insertions(+), 29 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/ti_k3_r5_remoteproc.c b/drivers/remoteproc/ti_k3_r5_remoteproc.c
index 5cf8d030a1f0..2975393ebacd 100644
--- a/drivers/remoteproc/ti_k3_r5_remoteproc.c
+++ b/drivers/remoteproc/ti_k3_r5_remoteproc.c
@@ -40,6 +40,8 @@
 #define PROC_BOOT_CFG_FLAG_R5_ATCM_EN			0x00002000
 /* Available from J7200 SoCs onwards */
 #define PROC_BOOT_CFG_FLAG_R5_MEM_INIT_DIS		0x00004000
+/* Applicable to only AM64x SoCs */
+#define PROC_BOOT_CFG_FLAG_R5_SINGLE_CORE		0x00008000
 
 /* R5 TI-SCI Processor Control Flags */
 #define PROC_BOOT_CTRL_FLAG_R5_CORE_HALT		0x00000001
@@ -49,6 +51,8 @@
 #define PROC_BOOT_STATUS_FLAG_R5_WFI			0x00000002
 #define PROC_BOOT_STATUS_FLAG_R5_CLK_GATED		0x00000004
 #define PROC_BOOT_STATUS_FLAG_R5_LOCKSTEP_PERMITTED	0x00000100
+/* Applicable to only AM64x SoCs */
+#define PROC_BOOT_STATUS_FLAG_R5_SINGLECORE_ONLY	0x00000200
 
 /**
  * struct k3_r5_mem - internal memory structure
@@ -64,19 +68,29 @@ struct k3_r5_mem {
 	size_t size;
 };
 
+/*
+ * All cluster mode values are not applicable on all SoCs. The following
+ * are the modes supported on various SoCs:
+ *   Split mode      : AM65x, J721E, J7200 and AM64x SoCs
+ *   LockStep mode   : AM65x, J721E and J7200 SoCs
+ *   Single-CPU mode : AM64x SoCs only
+ */
 enum cluster_mode {
 	CLUSTER_MODE_SPLIT = 0,
 	CLUSTER_MODE_LOCKSTEP,
+	CLUSTER_MODE_SINGLECPU,
 };
 
 /**
  * struct k3_r5_soc_data - match data to handle SoC variations
  * @tcm_is_double: flag to denote the larger unified TCMs in certain modes
  * @tcm_ecc_autoinit: flag to denote the auto-initialization of TCMs for ECC
+ * @single_cpu_mode: flag to denote if SoC/IP supports Single-CPU mode
  */
 struct k3_r5_soc_data {
 	bool tcm_is_double;
 	bool tcm_ecc_autoinit;
+	bool single_cpu_mode;
 };
 
 /**
@@ -369,6 +383,13 @@ static inline int k3_r5_core_run(struct k3_r5_core *core)
  * applicable cores to allow loading into the TCMs. The .prepare() ops is
  * invoked by remoteproc core before any firmware loading, and is followed
  * by the .start() ops after loading to actually let the R5 cores run.
+ *
+ * The Single-CPU mode on applicable SoCs (eg: AM64x) only uses Core0 to
+ * execute code, but combines the TCMs from both cores. The resets for both
+ * cores need to be released to make this possible, as the TCMs are in general
+ * private to each core. Only Core0 needs to be unhalted for running the
+ * cluster in this mode. The function uses the same reset logic as LockStep
+ * mode for this (though the behavior is agnostic of the reset release order).
  */
 static int k3_r5_rproc_prepare(struct rproc *rproc)
 {
@@ -386,7 +407,9 @@ static int k3_r5_rproc_prepare(struct rproc *rproc)
 		return ret;
 	mem_init_dis = !!(cfg & PROC_BOOT_CFG_FLAG_R5_MEM_INIT_DIS);
 
-	ret = (cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_LOCKSTEP) ?
+	/* Re-use LockStep-mode reset logic for Single-CPU mode */
+	ret = (cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_LOCKSTEP ||
+	       cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_SINGLECPU) ?
 		k3_r5_lockstep_release(cluster) : k3_r5_split_release(core);
 	if (ret) {
 		dev_err(dev, "unable to enable cores for TCM loading, ret = %d\n",
@@ -427,6 +450,12 @@ static int k3_r5_rproc_prepare(struct rproc *rproc)
  * cores. The cores themselves are only halted in the .stop() ops, and the
  * .unprepare() ops is invoked by the remoteproc core after the remoteproc is
  * stopped.
+ *
+ * The Single-CPU mode on applicable SoCs (eg: AM64x) combines the TCMs from
+ * both cores. The access is made possible only with releasing the resets for
+ * both cores, but with only Core0 unhalted. This function re-uses the same
+ * reset assert logic as LockStep mode for this mode (though the behavior is
+ * agnostic of the reset assert order).
  */
 static int k3_r5_rproc_unprepare(struct rproc *rproc)
 {
@@ -436,7 +465,9 @@ static int k3_r5_rproc_unprepare(struct rproc *rproc)
 	struct device *dev = kproc->dev;
 	int ret;
 
-	ret = (cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_LOCKSTEP) ?
+	/* Re-use LockStep-mode reset logic for Single-CPU mode */
+	ret = (cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_LOCKSTEP ||
+	       cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_SINGLECPU) ?
 		k3_r5_lockstep_reset(cluster) : k3_r5_split_reset(core);
 	if (ret)
 		dev_err(dev, "unable to disable cores, ret = %d\n", ret);
@@ -455,6 +486,10 @@ static int k3_r5_rproc_unprepare(struct rproc *rproc)
  * first followed by Core0. The Split-mode requires that Core0 to be maintained
  * always in a higher power state that Core1 (implying Core1 needs to be started
  * always only after Core0 is started).
+ *
+ * The Single-CPU mode on applicable SoCs (eg: AM64x) only uses Core0 to execute
+ * code, so only Core0 needs to be unhalted. The function uses the same logic
+ * flow as Split-mode for this.
  */
 static int k3_r5_rproc_start(struct rproc *rproc)
 {
@@ -539,6 +574,10 @@ static int k3_r5_rproc_start(struct rproc *rproc)
  * Core0 to be maintained always in a higher power state that Core1 (implying
  * Core1 needs to be stopped first before Core0).
  *
+ * The Single-CPU mode on applicable SoCs (eg: AM64x) only uses Core0 to execute
+ * code, so only Core0 needs to be halted. The function uses the same logic
+ * flow as Split-mode for this.
+ *
  * Note that the R5F halt operation in general is not effective when the R5F
  * core is running, but is needed to make sure the core won't run after
  * deasserting the reset the subsequent time. The asserting of reset can
@@ -665,7 +704,9 @@ static const struct rproc_ops k3_r5_rproc_ops = {
  *
  * Each R5FSS has a cluster-level setting for configuring the processor
  * subsystem either in a safety/fault-tolerant LockStep mode or a performance
- * oriented Split mode. Each R5F core has a number of settings to either
+ * oriented Split mode on most SoCs. A fewer SoCs support a non-safety mode
+ * as an alternate for LockStep mode that exercises only a single R5F core
+ * called Single-CPU mode. Each R5F core has a number of settings to either
  * enable/disable each of the TCMs, control which TCM appears at the R5F core's
  * address 0x0. These settings need to be configured before the resets for the
  * corresponding core are released. These settings are all protected and managed
@@ -677,11 +718,13 @@ static const struct rproc_ops k3_r5_rproc_ops = {
  * the cores are halted before the .prepare() step.
  *
  * The function is called from k3_r5_cluster_rproc_init() and is invoked either
- * once (in LockStep mode) or twice (in Split mode). Support for LockStep-mode
- * is dictated by an eFUSE register bit, and the config settings retrieved from
- * DT are adjusted accordingly as per the permitted cluster mode. All cluster
- * level settings like Cluster mode and TEINIT (exception handling state
- * dictating ARM or Thumb mode) can only be set and retrieved using Core0.
+ * once (in LockStep mode or Single-CPU modes) or twice (in Split mode). Support
+ * for LockStep-mode is dictated by an eFUSE register bit, and the config
+ * settings retrieved from DT are adjusted accordingly as per the permitted
+ * cluster mode. Another eFUSE register bit dictates if the R5F cluster only
+ * supports a Single-CPU mode. All cluster level settings like Cluster mode and
+ * TEINIT (exception handling state dictating ARM or Thumb mode) can only be set
+ * and retrieved using Core0.
  *
  * The function behavior is different based on the cluster mode. The R5F cores
  * are configured independently as per their individual settings in Split mode.
@@ -700,10 +743,16 @@ static int k3_r5_rproc_configure(struct k3_r5_rproc *kproc)
 	u32 set_cfg = 0, clr_cfg = 0;
 	u64 boot_vec = 0;
 	bool lockstep_en;
+	bool single_cpu;
 	int ret;
 
 	core0 = list_first_entry(&cluster->cores, struct k3_r5_core, elem);
-	core = (cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_LOCKSTEP) ? core0 : kproc->core;
+	if (cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_LOCKSTEP ||
+	    cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_SINGLECPU) {
+		core = core0;
+	} else {
+		core = kproc->core;
+	}
 
 	ret = ti_sci_proc_get_status(core->tsp, &boot_vec, &cfg, &ctrl,
 				     &stat);
@@ -713,23 +762,48 @@ static int k3_r5_rproc_configure(struct k3_r5_rproc *kproc)
 	dev_dbg(dev, "boot_vector = 0x%llx, cfg = 0x%x ctrl = 0x%x stat = 0x%x\n",
 		boot_vec, cfg, ctrl, stat);
 
+	/* check if only Single-CPU mode is supported on applicable SoCs */
+	if (cluster->soc_data->single_cpu_mode) {
+		single_cpu =
+			!!(stat & PROC_BOOT_STATUS_FLAG_R5_SINGLECORE_ONLY);
+		if (single_cpu && cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_SPLIT) {
+			dev_err(cluster->dev, "split-mode not permitted, force configuring for single-cpu mode\n");
+			cluster->mode = CLUSTER_MODE_SINGLECPU;
+		}
+		goto config;
+	}
+
+	/* check conventional LockStep vs Split mode configuration */
 	lockstep_en = !!(stat & PROC_BOOT_STATUS_FLAG_R5_LOCKSTEP_PERMITTED);
 	if (!lockstep_en && cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_LOCKSTEP) {
 		dev_err(cluster->dev, "lockstep mode not permitted, force configuring for split-mode\n");
 		cluster->mode = CLUSTER_MODE_SPLIT;
 	}
 
+config:
 	/* always enable ARM mode and set boot vector to 0 */
 	boot_vec = 0x0;
 	if (core == core0) {
 		clr_cfg = PROC_BOOT_CFG_FLAG_R5_TEINIT;
-		/*
-		 * LockStep configuration bit is Read-only on Split-mode _only_
-		 * devices and system firmware will NACK any requests with the
-		 * bit configured, so program it only on permitted devices
-		 */
-		if (lockstep_en)
-			clr_cfg |= PROC_BOOT_CFG_FLAG_R5_LOCKSTEP;
+		if (cluster->soc_data->single_cpu_mode) {
+			/*
+			 * Single-CPU configuration bit can only be configured
+			 * on Core0 and system firmware will NACK any requests
+			 * with the bit configured, so program it only on
+			 * permitted cores
+			 */
+			if (cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_SINGLECPU)
+				set_cfg = PROC_BOOT_CFG_FLAG_R5_SINGLE_CORE;
+		} else {
+			/*
+			 * LockStep configuration bit is Read-only on Split-mode
+			 * _only_ devices and system firmware will NACK any
+			 * requests with the bit configured, so program it only
+			 * on permitted devices
+			 */
+			if (lockstep_en)
+				clr_cfg |= PROC_BOOT_CFG_FLAG_R5_LOCKSTEP;
+		}
 	}
 
 	if (core->atcm_enable)
@@ -894,12 +968,12 @@ static void k3_r5_reserved_mem_exit(struct k3_r5_rproc *kproc)
  * cores are usable in Split-mode, but only the Core0 TCMs can be used in
  * LockStep-mode. The newer revisions of the R5FSS IP maximizes these TCMs by
  * leveraging the Core1 TCMs as well in certain modes where they would have
- * otherwise been unusable (Eg: LockStep-mode on J7200 SoCs). This is done by
- * making a Core1 TCM visible immediately after the corresponding Core0 TCM.
- * The SoC memory map uses the larger 64 KB sizes for the Core0 TCMs, and the
- * dts representation reflects this increased size on supported SoCs. The Core0
- * TCM sizes therefore have to be adjusted to only half the original size in
- * Split mode.
+ * otherwise been unusable (Eg: LockStep-mode on J7200 SoCs, Single-CPU mode on
+ * AM64x SoCs). This is done by making a Core1 TCM visible immediately after the
+ * corresponding Core0 TCM. The SoC memory map uses the larger 64 KB sizes for
+ * the Core0 TCMs, and the dts representation reflects this increased size on
+ * supported SoCs. The Core0 TCM sizes therefore have to be adjusted to only
+ * half the original size in Split mode.
  */
 static void k3_r5_adjust_tcm_sizes(struct k3_r5_rproc *kproc)
 {
@@ -909,6 +983,7 @@ static void k3_r5_adjust_tcm_sizes(struct k3_r5_rproc *kproc)
 	struct k3_r5_core *core0;
 
 	if (cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_LOCKSTEP ||
+	    cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_SINGLECPU ||
 	    !cluster->soc_data->tcm_is_double)
 		return;
 
@@ -987,8 +1062,9 @@ static int k3_r5_cluster_rproc_init(struct platform_device *pdev)
 			goto err_add;
 		}
 
-		/* create only one rproc in lockstep mode */
-		if (cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_LOCKSTEP)
+		/* create only one rproc in lockstep mode or single-cpu mode */
+		if (cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_LOCKSTEP ||
+		    cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_SINGLECPU)
 			break;
 	}
 
@@ -1020,11 +1096,12 @@ static void k3_r5_cluster_rproc_exit(void *data)
 	struct rproc *rproc;
 
 	/*
-	 * lockstep mode has only one rproc associated with first core, whereas
-	 * split-mode has two rprocs associated with each core, and requires
-	 * that core1 be powered down first
+	 * lockstep mode and single-cpu modes have only one rproc associated
+	 * with first core, whereas split-mode has two rprocs associated with
+	 * each core, and requires that core1 be powered down first
 	 */
-	core = (cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_LOCKSTEP) ?
+	core = (cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_LOCKSTEP ||
+		cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_SINGLECPU) ?
 		list_first_entry(&cluster->cores, struct k3_r5_core, elem) :
 		list_last_entry(&cluster->cores, struct k3_r5_core, elem);
 
@@ -1396,7 +1473,12 @@ static int k3_r5_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
 		return -ENOMEM;
 
 	cluster->dev = dev;
-	cluster->mode = CLUSTER_MODE_LOCKSTEP;
+	/*
+	 * default to most common efuse configurations - Split-mode on AM64x
+	 * and LockStep-mode on all others
+	 */
+	cluster->mode = data->single_cpu_mode ?
+				CLUSTER_MODE_SPLIT : CLUSTER_MODE_LOCKSTEP;
 	cluster->soc_data = data;
 	INIT_LIST_HEAD(&cluster->cores);
 
@@ -1450,17 +1532,26 @@ static int k3_r5_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
 static const struct k3_r5_soc_data am65_j721e_soc_data = {
 	.tcm_is_double = false,
 	.tcm_ecc_autoinit = false,
+	.single_cpu_mode = false,
 };
 
 static const struct k3_r5_soc_data j7200_soc_data = {
 	.tcm_is_double = true,
 	.tcm_ecc_autoinit = true,
+	.single_cpu_mode = false,
+};
+
+static const struct k3_r5_soc_data am64_soc_data = {
+	.tcm_is_double = true,
+	.tcm_ecc_autoinit = true,
+	.single_cpu_mode = true,
 };
 
 static const struct of_device_id k3_r5_of_match[] = {
 	{ .compatible = "ti,am654-r5fss", .data = &am65_j721e_soc_data, },
 	{ .compatible = "ti,j721e-r5fss", .data = &am65_j721e_soc_data, },
 	{ .compatible = "ti,j7200-r5fss", .data = &j7200_soc_data, },
+	{ .compatible = "ti,am64-r5fss",  .data = &am64_soc_data, },
 	{ /* sentinel */ },
 };
 MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, k3_r5_of_match);
-- 
2.30.1


^ permalink raw reply related	[flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v2 2/2] remoteproc: k3-r5: Extend support to R5F clusters on AM64x SoCs
@ 2021-03-27 14:31   ` Suman Anna
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: Suman Anna @ 2021-03-27 14:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Bjorn Andersson, Mathieu Poirier, Rob Herring
  Cc: devicetree, Lokesh Vutla, linux-remoteproc, linux-kernel,
	linux-arm-kernel

The K3 AM64x SoC family has a revised R5F sub-system and contains a
subset of the R5F clusters present on J721E SoCs. The K3 AM64x SoCs
only have two dual-core Arm R5F clusters/subsystems with 2 R5F cores
each present within the MAIN voltage domain (MAIN_R5FSS0 & MAIN_R5FSS1).

The revised IP has the following distinct features:
 1. The R5FSS IP supports a new "Single-CPU" mode instead of the LockStep
    mode on existing SoCs (AM65x, J721E or J7200). This mode is similar
    to LockStep-mode on J7200 SoCs in terms of TCM usage without the
    fault-tolerant safety feature provided by the LockStep mode.

    The Core1 TCMs are combined with the Core0 TCMs effectively doubling
    the amount of TCMs available in Single-CPU mode. The LockStep-mode
    on previous AM65x and J721E SoCs could only use the Core0 TCMs. These
    combined TCMs appear contiguous at the respective Core0 TCM addresses.
    The code though is executed only on a single CPU (on Core0), and as
    such, requires the halt signal to be programmed only for Core0, while
    the resets need to be managed for both the cores.

 2. TCMs are auto-initialized during module power-up, and the behavior
    is programmable through a MMR bit. This feature is the same as on
    the recent J7200 SoCs.

Extend the support to these clusters in the K3 R5F remoteproc driver
using AM64x specific compatibles. New TI-SCI flags and a unique cluster
mode are also needed for the cluster mode detection on these SoCs. The
reset assert and deassert sequence of both the cores in Single-CPU mode
is agnostic of the order, so the same LockStep reset and release sequences
are re-used.

The integration of these clusters is very much similar to existing SoCs
otherwise.

Signed-off-by: Suman Anna <s-anna@ti.com>
---
v2: 
 - Address a minor comment from Mathieu to drop the unnecessary hunk 
   double-checking the dt ti,cluster-mode values in k3_r5_probe()
v1: https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-remoteproc/patch/20210318215842.8196-3-s-anna@ti.com/

 drivers/remoteproc/ti_k3_r5_remoteproc.c | 149 ++++++++++++++++++-----
 1 file changed, 120 insertions(+), 29 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/ti_k3_r5_remoteproc.c b/drivers/remoteproc/ti_k3_r5_remoteproc.c
index 5cf8d030a1f0..2975393ebacd 100644
--- a/drivers/remoteproc/ti_k3_r5_remoteproc.c
+++ b/drivers/remoteproc/ti_k3_r5_remoteproc.c
@@ -40,6 +40,8 @@
 #define PROC_BOOT_CFG_FLAG_R5_ATCM_EN			0x00002000
 /* Available from J7200 SoCs onwards */
 #define PROC_BOOT_CFG_FLAG_R5_MEM_INIT_DIS		0x00004000
+/* Applicable to only AM64x SoCs */
+#define PROC_BOOT_CFG_FLAG_R5_SINGLE_CORE		0x00008000
 
 /* R5 TI-SCI Processor Control Flags */
 #define PROC_BOOT_CTRL_FLAG_R5_CORE_HALT		0x00000001
@@ -49,6 +51,8 @@
 #define PROC_BOOT_STATUS_FLAG_R5_WFI			0x00000002
 #define PROC_BOOT_STATUS_FLAG_R5_CLK_GATED		0x00000004
 #define PROC_BOOT_STATUS_FLAG_R5_LOCKSTEP_PERMITTED	0x00000100
+/* Applicable to only AM64x SoCs */
+#define PROC_BOOT_STATUS_FLAG_R5_SINGLECORE_ONLY	0x00000200
 
 /**
  * struct k3_r5_mem - internal memory structure
@@ -64,19 +68,29 @@ struct k3_r5_mem {
 	size_t size;
 };
 
+/*
+ * All cluster mode values are not applicable on all SoCs. The following
+ * are the modes supported on various SoCs:
+ *   Split mode      : AM65x, J721E, J7200 and AM64x SoCs
+ *   LockStep mode   : AM65x, J721E and J7200 SoCs
+ *   Single-CPU mode : AM64x SoCs only
+ */
 enum cluster_mode {
 	CLUSTER_MODE_SPLIT = 0,
 	CLUSTER_MODE_LOCKSTEP,
+	CLUSTER_MODE_SINGLECPU,
 };
 
 /**
  * struct k3_r5_soc_data - match data to handle SoC variations
  * @tcm_is_double: flag to denote the larger unified TCMs in certain modes
  * @tcm_ecc_autoinit: flag to denote the auto-initialization of TCMs for ECC
+ * @single_cpu_mode: flag to denote if SoC/IP supports Single-CPU mode
  */
 struct k3_r5_soc_data {
 	bool tcm_is_double;
 	bool tcm_ecc_autoinit;
+	bool single_cpu_mode;
 };
 
 /**
@@ -369,6 +383,13 @@ static inline int k3_r5_core_run(struct k3_r5_core *core)
  * applicable cores to allow loading into the TCMs. The .prepare() ops is
  * invoked by remoteproc core before any firmware loading, and is followed
  * by the .start() ops after loading to actually let the R5 cores run.
+ *
+ * The Single-CPU mode on applicable SoCs (eg: AM64x) only uses Core0 to
+ * execute code, but combines the TCMs from both cores. The resets for both
+ * cores need to be released to make this possible, as the TCMs are in general
+ * private to each core. Only Core0 needs to be unhalted for running the
+ * cluster in this mode. The function uses the same reset logic as LockStep
+ * mode for this (though the behavior is agnostic of the reset release order).
  */
 static int k3_r5_rproc_prepare(struct rproc *rproc)
 {
@@ -386,7 +407,9 @@ static int k3_r5_rproc_prepare(struct rproc *rproc)
 		return ret;
 	mem_init_dis = !!(cfg & PROC_BOOT_CFG_FLAG_R5_MEM_INIT_DIS);
 
-	ret = (cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_LOCKSTEP) ?
+	/* Re-use LockStep-mode reset logic for Single-CPU mode */
+	ret = (cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_LOCKSTEP ||
+	       cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_SINGLECPU) ?
 		k3_r5_lockstep_release(cluster) : k3_r5_split_release(core);
 	if (ret) {
 		dev_err(dev, "unable to enable cores for TCM loading, ret = %d\n",
@@ -427,6 +450,12 @@ static int k3_r5_rproc_prepare(struct rproc *rproc)
  * cores. The cores themselves are only halted in the .stop() ops, and the
  * .unprepare() ops is invoked by the remoteproc core after the remoteproc is
  * stopped.
+ *
+ * The Single-CPU mode on applicable SoCs (eg: AM64x) combines the TCMs from
+ * both cores. The access is made possible only with releasing the resets for
+ * both cores, but with only Core0 unhalted. This function re-uses the same
+ * reset assert logic as LockStep mode for this mode (though the behavior is
+ * agnostic of the reset assert order).
  */
 static int k3_r5_rproc_unprepare(struct rproc *rproc)
 {
@@ -436,7 +465,9 @@ static int k3_r5_rproc_unprepare(struct rproc *rproc)
 	struct device *dev = kproc->dev;
 	int ret;
 
-	ret = (cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_LOCKSTEP) ?
+	/* Re-use LockStep-mode reset logic for Single-CPU mode */
+	ret = (cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_LOCKSTEP ||
+	       cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_SINGLECPU) ?
 		k3_r5_lockstep_reset(cluster) : k3_r5_split_reset(core);
 	if (ret)
 		dev_err(dev, "unable to disable cores, ret = %d\n", ret);
@@ -455,6 +486,10 @@ static int k3_r5_rproc_unprepare(struct rproc *rproc)
  * first followed by Core0. The Split-mode requires that Core0 to be maintained
  * always in a higher power state that Core1 (implying Core1 needs to be started
  * always only after Core0 is started).
+ *
+ * The Single-CPU mode on applicable SoCs (eg: AM64x) only uses Core0 to execute
+ * code, so only Core0 needs to be unhalted. The function uses the same logic
+ * flow as Split-mode for this.
  */
 static int k3_r5_rproc_start(struct rproc *rproc)
 {
@@ -539,6 +574,10 @@ static int k3_r5_rproc_start(struct rproc *rproc)
  * Core0 to be maintained always in a higher power state that Core1 (implying
  * Core1 needs to be stopped first before Core0).
  *
+ * The Single-CPU mode on applicable SoCs (eg: AM64x) only uses Core0 to execute
+ * code, so only Core0 needs to be halted. The function uses the same logic
+ * flow as Split-mode for this.
+ *
  * Note that the R5F halt operation in general is not effective when the R5F
  * core is running, but is needed to make sure the core won't run after
  * deasserting the reset the subsequent time. The asserting of reset can
@@ -665,7 +704,9 @@ static const struct rproc_ops k3_r5_rproc_ops = {
  *
  * Each R5FSS has a cluster-level setting for configuring the processor
  * subsystem either in a safety/fault-tolerant LockStep mode or a performance
- * oriented Split mode. Each R5F core has a number of settings to either
+ * oriented Split mode on most SoCs. A fewer SoCs support a non-safety mode
+ * as an alternate for LockStep mode that exercises only a single R5F core
+ * called Single-CPU mode. Each R5F core has a number of settings to either
  * enable/disable each of the TCMs, control which TCM appears at the R5F core's
  * address 0x0. These settings need to be configured before the resets for the
  * corresponding core are released. These settings are all protected and managed
@@ -677,11 +718,13 @@ static const struct rproc_ops k3_r5_rproc_ops = {
  * the cores are halted before the .prepare() step.
  *
  * The function is called from k3_r5_cluster_rproc_init() and is invoked either
- * once (in LockStep mode) or twice (in Split mode). Support for LockStep-mode
- * is dictated by an eFUSE register bit, and the config settings retrieved from
- * DT are adjusted accordingly as per the permitted cluster mode. All cluster
- * level settings like Cluster mode and TEINIT (exception handling state
- * dictating ARM or Thumb mode) can only be set and retrieved using Core0.
+ * once (in LockStep mode or Single-CPU modes) or twice (in Split mode). Support
+ * for LockStep-mode is dictated by an eFUSE register bit, and the config
+ * settings retrieved from DT are adjusted accordingly as per the permitted
+ * cluster mode. Another eFUSE register bit dictates if the R5F cluster only
+ * supports a Single-CPU mode. All cluster level settings like Cluster mode and
+ * TEINIT (exception handling state dictating ARM or Thumb mode) can only be set
+ * and retrieved using Core0.
  *
  * The function behavior is different based on the cluster mode. The R5F cores
  * are configured independently as per their individual settings in Split mode.
@@ -700,10 +743,16 @@ static int k3_r5_rproc_configure(struct k3_r5_rproc *kproc)
 	u32 set_cfg = 0, clr_cfg = 0;
 	u64 boot_vec = 0;
 	bool lockstep_en;
+	bool single_cpu;
 	int ret;
 
 	core0 = list_first_entry(&cluster->cores, struct k3_r5_core, elem);
-	core = (cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_LOCKSTEP) ? core0 : kproc->core;
+	if (cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_LOCKSTEP ||
+	    cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_SINGLECPU) {
+		core = core0;
+	} else {
+		core = kproc->core;
+	}
 
 	ret = ti_sci_proc_get_status(core->tsp, &boot_vec, &cfg, &ctrl,
 				     &stat);
@@ -713,23 +762,48 @@ static int k3_r5_rproc_configure(struct k3_r5_rproc *kproc)
 	dev_dbg(dev, "boot_vector = 0x%llx, cfg = 0x%x ctrl = 0x%x stat = 0x%x\n",
 		boot_vec, cfg, ctrl, stat);
 
+	/* check if only Single-CPU mode is supported on applicable SoCs */
+	if (cluster->soc_data->single_cpu_mode) {
+		single_cpu =
+			!!(stat & PROC_BOOT_STATUS_FLAG_R5_SINGLECORE_ONLY);
+		if (single_cpu && cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_SPLIT) {
+			dev_err(cluster->dev, "split-mode not permitted, force configuring for single-cpu mode\n");
+			cluster->mode = CLUSTER_MODE_SINGLECPU;
+		}
+		goto config;
+	}
+
+	/* check conventional LockStep vs Split mode configuration */
 	lockstep_en = !!(stat & PROC_BOOT_STATUS_FLAG_R5_LOCKSTEP_PERMITTED);
 	if (!lockstep_en && cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_LOCKSTEP) {
 		dev_err(cluster->dev, "lockstep mode not permitted, force configuring for split-mode\n");
 		cluster->mode = CLUSTER_MODE_SPLIT;
 	}
 
+config:
 	/* always enable ARM mode and set boot vector to 0 */
 	boot_vec = 0x0;
 	if (core == core0) {
 		clr_cfg = PROC_BOOT_CFG_FLAG_R5_TEINIT;
-		/*
-		 * LockStep configuration bit is Read-only on Split-mode _only_
-		 * devices and system firmware will NACK any requests with the
-		 * bit configured, so program it only on permitted devices
-		 */
-		if (lockstep_en)
-			clr_cfg |= PROC_BOOT_CFG_FLAG_R5_LOCKSTEP;
+		if (cluster->soc_data->single_cpu_mode) {
+			/*
+			 * Single-CPU configuration bit can only be configured
+			 * on Core0 and system firmware will NACK any requests
+			 * with the bit configured, so program it only on
+			 * permitted cores
+			 */
+			if (cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_SINGLECPU)
+				set_cfg = PROC_BOOT_CFG_FLAG_R5_SINGLE_CORE;
+		} else {
+			/*
+			 * LockStep configuration bit is Read-only on Split-mode
+			 * _only_ devices and system firmware will NACK any
+			 * requests with the bit configured, so program it only
+			 * on permitted devices
+			 */
+			if (lockstep_en)
+				clr_cfg |= PROC_BOOT_CFG_FLAG_R5_LOCKSTEP;
+		}
 	}
 
 	if (core->atcm_enable)
@@ -894,12 +968,12 @@ static void k3_r5_reserved_mem_exit(struct k3_r5_rproc *kproc)
  * cores are usable in Split-mode, but only the Core0 TCMs can be used in
  * LockStep-mode. The newer revisions of the R5FSS IP maximizes these TCMs by
  * leveraging the Core1 TCMs as well in certain modes where they would have
- * otherwise been unusable (Eg: LockStep-mode on J7200 SoCs). This is done by
- * making a Core1 TCM visible immediately after the corresponding Core0 TCM.
- * The SoC memory map uses the larger 64 KB sizes for the Core0 TCMs, and the
- * dts representation reflects this increased size on supported SoCs. The Core0
- * TCM sizes therefore have to be adjusted to only half the original size in
- * Split mode.
+ * otherwise been unusable (Eg: LockStep-mode on J7200 SoCs, Single-CPU mode on
+ * AM64x SoCs). This is done by making a Core1 TCM visible immediately after the
+ * corresponding Core0 TCM. The SoC memory map uses the larger 64 KB sizes for
+ * the Core0 TCMs, and the dts representation reflects this increased size on
+ * supported SoCs. The Core0 TCM sizes therefore have to be adjusted to only
+ * half the original size in Split mode.
  */
 static void k3_r5_adjust_tcm_sizes(struct k3_r5_rproc *kproc)
 {
@@ -909,6 +983,7 @@ static void k3_r5_adjust_tcm_sizes(struct k3_r5_rproc *kproc)
 	struct k3_r5_core *core0;
 
 	if (cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_LOCKSTEP ||
+	    cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_SINGLECPU ||
 	    !cluster->soc_data->tcm_is_double)
 		return;
 
@@ -987,8 +1062,9 @@ static int k3_r5_cluster_rproc_init(struct platform_device *pdev)
 			goto err_add;
 		}
 
-		/* create only one rproc in lockstep mode */
-		if (cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_LOCKSTEP)
+		/* create only one rproc in lockstep mode or single-cpu mode */
+		if (cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_LOCKSTEP ||
+		    cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_SINGLECPU)
 			break;
 	}
 
@@ -1020,11 +1096,12 @@ static void k3_r5_cluster_rproc_exit(void *data)
 	struct rproc *rproc;
 
 	/*
-	 * lockstep mode has only one rproc associated with first core, whereas
-	 * split-mode has two rprocs associated with each core, and requires
-	 * that core1 be powered down first
+	 * lockstep mode and single-cpu modes have only one rproc associated
+	 * with first core, whereas split-mode has two rprocs associated with
+	 * each core, and requires that core1 be powered down first
 	 */
-	core = (cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_LOCKSTEP) ?
+	core = (cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_LOCKSTEP ||
+		cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_SINGLECPU) ?
 		list_first_entry(&cluster->cores, struct k3_r5_core, elem) :
 		list_last_entry(&cluster->cores, struct k3_r5_core, elem);
 
@@ -1396,7 +1473,12 @@ static int k3_r5_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
 		return -ENOMEM;
 
 	cluster->dev = dev;
-	cluster->mode = CLUSTER_MODE_LOCKSTEP;
+	/*
+	 * default to most common efuse configurations - Split-mode on AM64x
+	 * and LockStep-mode on all others
+	 */
+	cluster->mode = data->single_cpu_mode ?
+				CLUSTER_MODE_SPLIT : CLUSTER_MODE_LOCKSTEP;
 	cluster->soc_data = data;
 	INIT_LIST_HEAD(&cluster->cores);
 
@@ -1450,17 +1532,26 @@ static int k3_r5_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
 static const struct k3_r5_soc_data am65_j721e_soc_data = {
 	.tcm_is_double = false,
 	.tcm_ecc_autoinit = false,
+	.single_cpu_mode = false,
 };
 
 static const struct k3_r5_soc_data j7200_soc_data = {
 	.tcm_is_double = true,
 	.tcm_ecc_autoinit = true,
+	.single_cpu_mode = false,
+};
+
+static const struct k3_r5_soc_data am64_soc_data = {
+	.tcm_is_double = true,
+	.tcm_ecc_autoinit = true,
+	.single_cpu_mode = true,
 };
 
 static const struct of_device_id k3_r5_of_match[] = {
 	{ .compatible = "ti,am654-r5fss", .data = &am65_j721e_soc_data, },
 	{ .compatible = "ti,j721e-r5fss", .data = &am65_j721e_soc_data, },
 	{ .compatible = "ti,j7200-r5fss", .data = &j7200_soc_data, },
+	{ .compatible = "ti,am64-r5fss",  .data = &am64_soc_data, },
 	{ /* sentinel */ },
 };
 MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, k3_r5_of_match);
-- 
2.30.1


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

^ permalink raw reply related	[flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] remoteproc: k3-r5: Extend support to R5F clusters on AM64x SoCs
  2021-03-27 14:31   ` Suman Anna
@ 2021-03-29 15:44     ` Mathieu Poirier
  -1 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: Mathieu Poirier @ 2021-03-29 15:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Suman Anna
  Cc: Bjorn Andersson, Rob Herring, Lokesh Vutla, linux-remoteproc,
	devicetree, linux-arm-kernel, linux-kernel

On Sat, Mar 27, 2021 at 09:31:17AM -0500, Suman Anna wrote:
> The K3 AM64x SoC family has a revised R5F sub-system and contains a
> subset of the R5F clusters present on J721E SoCs. The K3 AM64x SoCs
> only have two dual-core Arm R5F clusters/subsystems with 2 R5F cores
> each present within the MAIN voltage domain (MAIN_R5FSS0 & MAIN_R5FSS1).
> 
> The revised IP has the following distinct features:
>  1. The R5FSS IP supports a new "Single-CPU" mode instead of the LockStep
>     mode on existing SoCs (AM65x, J721E or J7200). This mode is similar
>     to LockStep-mode on J7200 SoCs in terms of TCM usage without the
>     fault-tolerant safety feature provided by the LockStep mode.
> 
>     The Core1 TCMs are combined with the Core0 TCMs effectively doubling
>     the amount of TCMs available in Single-CPU mode. The LockStep-mode
>     on previous AM65x and J721E SoCs could only use the Core0 TCMs. These
>     combined TCMs appear contiguous at the respective Core0 TCM addresses.
>     The code though is executed only on a single CPU (on Core0), and as
>     such, requires the halt signal to be programmed only for Core0, while
>     the resets need to be managed for both the cores.
> 
>  2. TCMs are auto-initialized during module power-up, and the behavior
>     is programmable through a MMR bit. This feature is the same as on
>     the recent J7200 SoCs.
> 
> Extend the support to these clusters in the K3 R5F remoteproc driver
> using AM64x specific compatibles. New TI-SCI flags and a unique cluster
> mode are also needed for the cluster mode detection on these SoCs. The
> reset assert and deassert sequence of both the cores in Single-CPU mode
> is agnostic of the order, so the same LockStep reset and release sequences
> are re-used.
> 
> The integration of these clusters is very much similar to existing SoCs
> otherwise.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Suman Anna <s-anna@ti.com>
> ---
> v2: 
>  - Address a minor comment from Mathieu to drop the unnecessary hunk 
>    double-checking the dt ti,cluster-mode values in k3_r5_probe()
> v1: https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-remoteproc/patch/20210318215842.8196-3-s-anna@ti.com/
> 
>  drivers/remoteproc/ti_k3_r5_remoteproc.c | 149 ++++++++++++++++++-----
>  1 file changed, 120 insertions(+), 29 deletions(-)
>

Reviewed-by: Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@linaro.org>
 
> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/ti_k3_r5_remoteproc.c b/drivers/remoteproc/ti_k3_r5_remoteproc.c
> index 5cf8d030a1f0..2975393ebacd 100644
> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/ti_k3_r5_remoteproc.c
> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/ti_k3_r5_remoteproc.c
> @@ -40,6 +40,8 @@
>  #define PROC_BOOT_CFG_FLAG_R5_ATCM_EN			0x00002000
>  /* Available from J7200 SoCs onwards */
>  #define PROC_BOOT_CFG_FLAG_R5_MEM_INIT_DIS		0x00004000
> +/* Applicable to only AM64x SoCs */
> +#define PROC_BOOT_CFG_FLAG_R5_SINGLE_CORE		0x00008000
>  
>  /* R5 TI-SCI Processor Control Flags */
>  #define PROC_BOOT_CTRL_FLAG_R5_CORE_HALT		0x00000001
> @@ -49,6 +51,8 @@
>  #define PROC_BOOT_STATUS_FLAG_R5_WFI			0x00000002
>  #define PROC_BOOT_STATUS_FLAG_R5_CLK_GATED		0x00000004
>  #define PROC_BOOT_STATUS_FLAG_R5_LOCKSTEP_PERMITTED	0x00000100
> +/* Applicable to only AM64x SoCs */
> +#define PROC_BOOT_STATUS_FLAG_R5_SINGLECORE_ONLY	0x00000200
>  
>  /**
>   * struct k3_r5_mem - internal memory structure
> @@ -64,19 +68,29 @@ struct k3_r5_mem {
>  	size_t size;
>  };
>  
> +/*
> + * All cluster mode values are not applicable on all SoCs. The following
> + * are the modes supported on various SoCs:
> + *   Split mode      : AM65x, J721E, J7200 and AM64x SoCs
> + *   LockStep mode   : AM65x, J721E and J7200 SoCs
> + *   Single-CPU mode : AM64x SoCs only
> + */
>  enum cluster_mode {
>  	CLUSTER_MODE_SPLIT = 0,
>  	CLUSTER_MODE_LOCKSTEP,
> +	CLUSTER_MODE_SINGLECPU,
>  };
>  
>  /**
>   * struct k3_r5_soc_data - match data to handle SoC variations
>   * @tcm_is_double: flag to denote the larger unified TCMs in certain modes
>   * @tcm_ecc_autoinit: flag to denote the auto-initialization of TCMs for ECC
> + * @single_cpu_mode: flag to denote if SoC/IP supports Single-CPU mode
>   */
>  struct k3_r5_soc_data {
>  	bool tcm_is_double;
>  	bool tcm_ecc_autoinit;
> +	bool single_cpu_mode;
>  };
>  
>  /**
> @@ -369,6 +383,13 @@ static inline int k3_r5_core_run(struct k3_r5_core *core)
>   * applicable cores to allow loading into the TCMs. The .prepare() ops is
>   * invoked by remoteproc core before any firmware loading, and is followed
>   * by the .start() ops after loading to actually let the R5 cores run.
> + *
> + * The Single-CPU mode on applicable SoCs (eg: AM64x) only uses Core0 to
> + * execute code, but combines the TCMs from both cores. The resets for both
> + * cores need to be released to make this possible, as the TCMs are in general
> + * private to each core. Only Core0 needs to be unhalted for running the
> + * cluster in this mode. The function uses the same reset logic as LockStep
> + * mode for this (though the behavior is agnostic of the reset release order).
>   */
>  static int k3_r5_rproc_prepare(struct rproc *rproc)
>  {
> @@ -386,7 +407,9 @@ static int k3_r5_rproc_prepare(struct rproc *rproc)
>  		return ret;
>  	mem_init_dis = !!(cfg & PROC_BOOT_CFG_FLAG_R5_MEM_INIT_DIS);
>  
> -	ret = (cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_LOCKSTEP) ?
> +	/* Re-use LockStep-mode reset logic for Single-CPU mode */
> +	ret = (cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_LOCKSTEP ||
> +	       cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_SINGLECPU) ?
>  		k3_r5_lockstep_release(cluster) : k3_r5_split_release(core);
>  	if (ret) {
>  		dev_err(dev, "unable to enable cores for TCM loading, ret = %d\n",
> @@ -427,6 +450,12 @@ static int k3_r5_rproc_prepare(struct rproc *rproc)
>   * cores. The cores themselves are only halted in the .stop() ops, and the
>   * .unprepare() ops is invoked by the remoteproc core after the remoteproc is
>   * stopped.
> + *
> + * The Single-CPU mode on applicable SoCs (eg: AM64x) combines the TCMs from
> + * both cores. The access is made possible only with releasing the resets for
> + * both cores, but with only Core0 unhalted. This function re-uses the same
> + * reset assert logic as LockStep mode for this mode (though the behavior is
> + * agnostic of the reset assert order).
>   */
>  static int k3_r5_rproc_unprepare(struct rproc *rproc)
>  {
> @@ -436,7 +465,9 @@ static int k3_r5_rproc_unprepare(struct rproc *rproc)
>  	struct device *dev = kproc->dev;
>  	int ret;
>  
> -	ret = (cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_LOCKSTEP) ?
> +	/* Re-use LockStep-mode reset logic for Single-CPU mode */
> +	ret = (cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_LOCKSTEP ||
> +	       cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_SINGLECPU) ?
>  		k3_r5_lockstep_reset(cluster) : k3_r5_split_reset(core);
>  	if (ret)
>  		dev_err(dev, "unable to disable cores, ret = %d\n", ret);
> @@ -455,6 +486,10 @@ static int k3_r5_rproc_unprepare(struct rproc *rproc)
>   * first followed by Core0. The Split-mode requires that Core0 to be maintained
>   * always in a higher power state that Core1 (implying Core1 needs to be started
>   * always only after Core0 is started).
> + *
> + * The Single-CPU mode on applicable SoCs (eg: AM64x) only uses Core0 to execute
> + * code, so only Core0 needs to be unhalted. The function uses the same logic
> + * flow as Split-mode for this.
>   */
>  static int k3_r5_rproc_start(struct rproc *rproc)
>  {
> @@ -539,6 +574,10 @@ static int k3_r5_rproc_start(struct rproc *rproc)
>   * Core0 to be maintained always in a higher power state that Core1 (implying
>   * Core1 needs to be stopped first before Core0).
>   *
> + * The Single-CPU mode on applicable SoCs (eg: AM64x) only uses Core0 to execute
> + * code, so only Core0 needs to be halted. The function uses the same logic
> + * flow as Split-mode for this.
> + *
>   * Note that the R5F halt operation in general is not effective when the R5F
>   * core is running, but is needed to make sure the core won't run after
>   * deasserting the reset the subsequent time. The asserting of reset can
> @@ -665,7 +704,9 @@ static const struct rproc_ops k3_r5_rproc_ops = {
>   *
>   * Each R5FSS has a cluster-level setting for configuring the processor
>   * subsystem either in a safety/fault-tolerant LockStep mode or a performance
> - * oriented Split mode. Each R5F core has a number of settings to either
> + * oriented Split mode on most SoCs. A fewer SoCs support a non-safety mode
> + * as an alternate for LockStep mode that exercises only a single R5F core
> + * called Single-CPU mode. Each R5F core has a number of settings to either
>   * enable/disable each of the TCMs, control which TCM appears at the R5F core's
>   * address 0x0. These settings need to be configured before the resets for the
>   * corresponding core are released. These settings are all protected and managed
> @@ -677,11 +718,13 @@ static const struct rproc_ops k3_r5_rproc_ops = {
>   * the cores are halted before the .prepare() step.
>   *
>   * The function is called from k3_r5_cluster_rproc_init() and is invoked either
> - * once (in LockStep mode) or twice (in Split mode). Support for LockStep-mode
> - * is dictated by an eFUSE register bit, and the config settings retrieved from
> - * DT are adjusted accordingly as per the permitted cluster mode. All cluster
> - * level settings like Cluster mode and TEINIT (exception handling state
> - * dictating ARM or Thumb mode) can only be set and retrieved using Core0.
> + * once (in LockStep mode or Single-CPU modes) or twice (in Split mode). Support
> + * for LockStep-mode is dictated by an eFUSE register bit, and the config
> + * settings retrieved from DT are adjusted accordingly as per the permitted
> + * cluster mode. Another eFUSE register bit dictates if the R5F cluster only
> + * supports a Single-CPU mode. All cluster level settings like Cluster mode and
> + * TEINIT (exception handling state dictating ARM or Thumb mode) can only be set
> + * and retrieved using Core0.
>   *
>   * The function behavior is different based on the cluster mode. The R5F cores
>   * are configured independently as per their individual settings in Split mode.
> @@ -700,10 +743,16 @@ static int k3_r5_rproc_configure(struct k3_r5_rproc *kproc)
>  	u32 set_cfg = 0, clr_cfg = 0;
>  	u64 boot_vec = 0;
>  	bool lockstep_en;
> +	bool single_cpu;
>  	int ret;
>  
>  	core0 = list_first_entry(&cluster->cores, struct k3_r5_core, elem);
> -	core = (cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_LOCKSTEP) ? core0 : kproc->core;
> +	if (cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_LOCKSTEP ||
> +	    cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_SINGLECPU) {
> +		core = core0;
> +	} else {
> +		core = kproc->core;
> +	}
>  
>  	ret = ti_sci_proc_get_status(core->tsp, &boot_vec, &cfg, &ctrl,
>  				     &stat);
> @@ -713,23 +762,48 @@ static int k3_r5_rproc_configure(struct k3_r5_rproc *kproc)
>  	dev_dbg(dev, "boot_vector = 0x%llx, cfg = 0x%x ctrl = 0x%x stat = 0x%x\n",
>  		boot_vec, cfg, ctrl, stat);
>  
> +	/* check if only Single-CPU mode is supported on applicable SoCs */
> +	if (cluster->soc_data->single_cpu_mode) {
> +		single_cpu =
> +			!!(stat & PROC_BOOT_STATUS_FLAG_R5_SINGLECORE_ONLY);
> +		if (single_cpu && cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_SPLIT) {
> +			dev_err(cluster->dev, "split-mode not permitted, force configuring for single-cpu mode\n");
> +			cluster->mode = CLUSTER_MODE_SINGLECPU;
> +		}
> +		goto config;
> +	}
> +
> +	/* check conventional LockStep vs Split mode configuration */
>  	lockstep_en = !!(stat & PROC_BOOT_STATUS_FLAG_R5_LOCKSTEP_PERMITTED);
>  	if (!lockstep_en && cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_LOCKSTEP) {
>  		dev_err(cluster->dev, "lockstep mode not permitted, force configuring for split-mode\n");
>  		cluster->mode = CLUSTER_MODE_SPLIT;
>  	}
>  
> +config:
>  	/* always enable ARM mode and set boot vector to 0 */
>  	boot_vec = 0x0;
>  	if (core == core0) {
>  		clr_cfg = PROC_BOOT_CFG_FLAG_R5_TEINIT;
> -		/*
> -		 * LockStep configuration bit is Read-only on Split-mode _only_
> -		 * devices and system firmware will NACK any requests with the
> -		 * bit configured, so program it only on permitted devices
> -		 */
> -		if (lockstep_en)
> -			clr_cfg |= PROC_BOOT_CFG_FLAG_R5_LOCKSTEP;
> +		if (cluster->soc_data->single_cpu_mode) {
> +			/*
> +			 * Single-CPU configuration bit can only be configured
> +			 * on Core0 and system firmware will NACK any requests
> +			 * with the bit configured, so program it only on
> +			 * permitted cores
> +			 */
> +			if (cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_SINGLECPU)
> +				set_cfg = PROC_BOOT_CFG_FLAG_R5_SINGLE_CORE;
> +		} else {
> +			/*
> +			 * LockStep configuration bit is Read-only on Split-mode
> +			 * _only_ devices and system firmware will NACK any
> +			 * requests with the bit configured, so program it only
> +			 * on permitted devices
> +			 */
> +			if (lockstep_en)
> +				clr_cfg |= PROC_BOOT_CFG_FLAG_R5_LOCKSTEP;
> +		}
>  	}
>  
>  	if (core->atcm_enable)
> @@ -894,12 +968,12 @@ static void k3_r5_reserved_mem_exit(struct k3_r5_rproc *kproc)
>   * cores are usable in Split-mode, but only the Core0 TCMs can be used in
>   * LockStep-mode. The newer revisions of the R5FSS IP maximizes these TCMs by
>   * leveraging the Core1 TCMs as well in certain modes where they would have
> - * otherwise been unusable (Eg: LockStep-mode on J7200 SoCs). This is done by
> - * making a Core1 TCM visible immediately after the corresponding Core0 TCM.
> - * The SoC memory map uses the larger 64 KB sizes for the Core0 TCMs, and the
> - * dts representation reflects this increased size on supported SoCs. The Core0
> - * TCM sizes therefore have to be adjusted to only half the original size in
> - * Split mode.
> + * otherwise been unusable (Eg: LockStep-mode on J7200 SoCs, Single-CPU mode on
> + * AM64x SoCs). This is done by making a Core1 TCM visible immediately after the
> + * corresponding Core0 TCM. The SoC memory map uses the larger 64 KB sizes for
> + * the Core0 TCMs, and the dts representation reflects this increased size on
> + * supported SoCs. The Core0 TCM sizes therefore have to be adjusted to only
> + * half the original size in Split mode.
>   */
>  static void k3_r5_adjust_tcm_sizes(struct k3_r5_rproc *kproc)
>  {
> @@ -909,6 +983,7 @@ static void k3_r5_adjust_tcm_sizes(struct k3_r5_rproc *kproc)
>  	struct k3_r5_core *core0;
>  
>  	if (cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_LOCKSTEP ||
> +	    cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_SINGLECPU ||
>  	    !cluster->soc_data->tcm_is_double)
>  		return;
>  
> @@ -987,8 +1062,9 @@ static int k3_r5_cluster_rproc_init(struct platform_device *pdev)
>  			goto err_add;
>  		}
>  
> -		/* create only one rproc in lockstep mode */
> -		if (cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_LOCKSTEP)
> +		/* create only one rproc in lockstep mode or single-cpu mode */
> +		if (cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_LOCKSTEP ||
> +		    cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_SINGLECPU)
>  			break;
>  	}
>  
> @@ -1020,11 +1096,12 @@ static void k3_r5_cluster_rproc_exit(void *data)
>  	struct rproc *rproc;
>  
>  	/*
> -	 * lockstep mode has only one rproc associated with first core, whereas
> -	 * split-mode has two rprocs associated with each core, and requires
> -	 * that core1 be powered down first
> +	 * lockstep mode and single-cpu modes have only one rproc associated
> +	 * with first core, whereas split-mode has two rprocs associated with
> +	 * each core, and requires that core1 be powered down first
>  	 */
> -	core = (cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_LOCKSTEP) ?
> +	core = (cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_LOCKSTEP ||
> +		cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_SINGLECPU) ?
>  		list_first_entry(&cluster->cores, struct k3_r5_core, elem) :
>  		list_last_entry(&cluster->cores, struct k3_r5_core, elem);
>  
> @@ -1396,7 +1473,12 @@ static int k3_r5_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>  		return -ENOMEM;
>  
>  	cluster->dev = dev;
> -	cluster->mode = CLUSTER_MODE_LOCKSTEP;
> +	/*
> +	 * default to most common efuse configurations - Split-mode on AM64x
> +	 * and LockStep-mode on all others
> +	 */
> +	cluster->mode = data->single_cpu_mode ?
> +				CLUSTER_MODE_SPLIT : CLUSTER_MODE_LOCKSTEP;
>  	cluster->soc_data = data;
>  	INIT_LIST_HEAD(&cluster->cores);
>  
> @@ -1450,17 +1532,26 @@ static int k3_r5_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>  static const struct k3_r5_soc_data am65_j721e_soc_data = {
>  	.tcm_is_double = false,
>  	.tcm_ecc_autoinit = false,
> +	.single_cpu_mode = false,
>  };
>  
>  static const struct k3_r5_soc_data j7200_soc_data = {
>  	.tcm_is_double = true,
>  	.tcm_ecc_autoinit = true,
> +	.single_cpu_mode = false,
> +};
> +
> +static const struct k3_r5_soc_data am64_soc_data = {
> +	.tcm_is_double = true,
> +	.tcm_ecc_autoinit = true,
> +	.single_cpu_mode = true,
>  };
>  
>  static const struct of_device_id k3_r5_of_match[] = {
>  	{ .compatible = "ti,am654-r5fss", .data = &am65_j721e_soc_data, },
>  	{ .compatible = "ti,j721e-r5fss", .data = &am65_j721e_soc_data, },
>  	{ .compatible = "ti,j7200-r5fss", .data = &j7200_soc_data, },
> +	{ .compatible = "ti,am64-r5fss",  .data = &am64_soc_data, },
>  	{ /* sentinel */ },
>  };
>  MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, k3_r5_of_match);
> -- 
> 2.30.1
> 

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] remoteproc: k3-r5: Extend support to R5F clusters on AM64x SoCs
@ 2021-03-29 15:44     ` Mathieu Poirier
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: Mathieu Poirier @ 2021-03-29 15:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Suman Anna
  Cc: Bjorn Andersson, Rob Herring, Lokesh Vutla, linux-remoteproc,
	devicetree, linux-arm-kernel, linux-kernel

On Sat, Mar 27, 2021 at 09:31:17AM -0500, Suman Anna wrote:
> The K3 AM64x SoC family has a revised R5F sub-system and contains a
> subset of the R5F clusters present on J721E SoCs. The K3 AM64x SoCs
> only have two dual-core Arm R5F clusters/subsystems with 2 R5F cores
> each present within the MAIN voltage domain (MAIN_R5FSS0 & MAIN_R5FSS1).
> 
> The revised IP has the following distinct features:
>  1. The R5FSS IP supports a new "Single-CPU" mode instead of the LockStep
>     mode on existing SoCs (AM65x, J721E or J7200). This mode is similar
>     to LockStep-mode on J7200 SoCs in terms of TCM usage without the
>     fault-tolerant safety feature provided by the LockStep mode.
> 
>     The Core1 TCMs are combined with the Core0 TCMs effectively doubling
>     the amount of TCMs available in Single-CPU mode. The LockStep-mode
>     on previous AM65x and J721E SoCs could only use the Core0 TCMs. These
>     combined TCMs appear contiguous at the respective Core0 TCM addresses.
>     The code though is executed only on a single CPU (on Core0), and as
>     such, requires the halt signal to be programmed only for Core0, while
>     the resets need to be managed for both the cores.
> 
>  2. TCMs are auto-initialized during module power-up, and the behavior
>     is programmable through a MMR bit. This feature is the same as on
>     the recent J7200 SoCs.
> 
> Extend the support to these clusters in the K3 R5F remoteproc driver
> using AM64x specific compatibles. New TI-SCI flags and a unique cluster
> mode are also needed for the cluster mode detection on these SoCs. The
> reset assert and deassert sequence of both the cores in Single-CPU mode
> is agnostic of the order, so the same LockStep reset and release sequences
> are re-used.
> 
> The integration of these clusters is very much similar to existing SoCs
> otherwise.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Suman Anna <s-anna@ti.com>
> ---
> v2: 
>  - Address a minor comment from Mathieu to drop the unnecessary hunk 
>    double-checking the dt ti,cluster-mode values in k3_r5_probe()
> v1: https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-remoteproc/patch/20210318215842.8196-3-s-anna@ti.com/
> 
>  drivers/remoteproc/ti_k3_r5_remoteproc.c | 149 ++++++++++++++++++-----
>  1 file changed, 120 insertions(+), 29 deletions(-)
>

Reviewed-by: Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@linaro.org>
 
> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/ti_k3_r5_remoteproc.c b/drivers/remoteproc/ti_k3_r5_remoteproc.c
> index 5cf8d030a1f0..2975393ebacd 100644
> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/ti_k3_r5_remoteproc.c
> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/ti_k3_r5_remoteproc.c
> @@ -40,6 +40,8 @@
>  #define PROC_BOOT_CFG_FLAG_R5_ATCM_EN			0x00002000
>  /* Available from J7200 SoCs onwards */
>  #define PROC_BOOT_CFG_FLAG_R5_MEM_INIT_DIS		0x00004000
> +/* Applicable to only AM64x SoCs */
> +#define PROC_BOOT_CFG_FLAG_R5_SINGLE_CORE		0x00008000
>  
>  /* R5 TI-SCI Processor Control Flags */
>  #define PROC_BOOT_CTRL_FLAG_R5_CORE_HALT		0x00000001
> @@ -49,6 +51,8 @@
>  #define PROC_BOOT_STATUS_FLAG_R5_WFI			0x00000002
>  #define PROC_BOOT_STATUS_FLAG_R5_CLK_GATED		0x00000004
>  #define PROC_BOOT_STATUS_FLAG_R5_LOCKSTEP_PERMITTED	0x00000100
> +/* Applicable to only AM64x SoCs */
> +#define PROC_BOOT_STATUS_FLAG_R5_SINGLECORE_ONLY	0x00000200
>  
>  /**
>   * struct k3_r5_mem - internal memory structure
> @@ -64,19 +68,29 @@ struct k3_r5_mem {
>  	size_t size;
>  };
>  
> +/*
> + * All cluster mode values are not applicable on all SoCs. The following
> + * are the modes supported on various SoCs:
> + *   Split mode      : AM65x, J721E, J7200 and AM64x SoCs
> + *   LockStep mode   : AM65x, J721E and J7200 SoCs
> + *   Single-CPU mode : AM64x SoCs only
> + */
>  enum cluster_mode {
>  	CLUSTER_MODE_SPLIT = 0,
>  	CLUSTER_MODE_LOCKSTEP,
> +	CLUSTER_MODE_SINGLECPU,
>  };
>  
>  /**
>   * struct k3_r5_soc_data - match data to handle SoC variations
>   * @tcm_is_double: flag to denote the larger unified TCMs in certain modes
>   * @tcm_ecc_autoinit: flag to denote the auto-initialization of TCMs for ECC
> + * @single_cpu_mode: flag to denote if SoC/IP supports Single-CPU mode
>   */
>  struct k3_r5_soc_data {
>  	bool tcm_is_double;
>  	bool tcm_ecc_autoinit;
> +	bool single_cpu_mode;
>  };
>  
>  /**
> @@ -369,6 +383,13 @@ static inline int k3_r5_core_run(struct k3_r5_core *core)
>   * applicable cores to allow loading into the TCMs. The .prepare() ops is
>   * invoked by remoteproc core before any firmware loading, and is followed
>   * by the .start() ops after loading to actually let the R5 cores run.
> + *
> + * The Single-CPU mode on applicable SoCs (eg: AM64x) only uses Core0 to
> + * execute code, but combines the TCMs from both cores. The resets for both
> + * cores need to be released to make this possible, as the TCMs are in general
> + * private to each core. Only Core0 needs to be unhalted for running the
> + * cluster in this mode. The function uses the same reset logic as LockStep
> + * mode for this (though the behavior is agnostic of the reset release order).
>   */
>  static int k3_r5_rproc_prepare(struct rproc *rproc)
>  {
> @@ -386,7 +407,9 @@ static int k3_r5_rproc_prepare(struct rproc *rproc)
>  		return ret;
>  	mem_init_dis = !!(cfg & PROC_BOOT_CFG_FLAG_R5_MEM_INIT_DIS);
>  
> -	ret = (cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_LOCKSTEP) ?
> +	/* Re-use LockStep-mode reset logic for Single-CPU mode */
> +	ret = (cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_LOCKSTEP ||
> +	       cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_SINGLECPU) ?
>  		k3_r5_lockstep_release(cluster) : k3_r5_split_release(core);
>  	if (ret) {
>  		dev_err(dev, "unable to enable cores for TCM loading, ret = %d\n",
> @@ -427,6 +450,12 @@ static int k3_r5_rproc_prepare(struct rproc *rproc)
>   * cores. The cores themselves are only halted in the .stop() ops, and the
>   * .unprepare() ops is invoked by the remoteproc core after the remoteproc is
>   * stopped.
> + *
> + * The Single-CPU mode on applicable SoCs (eg: AM64x) combines the TCMs from
> + * both cores. The access is made possible only with releasing the resets for
> + * both cores, but with only Core0 unhalted. This function re-uses the same
> + * reset assert logic as LockStep mode for this mode (though the behavior is
> + * agnostic of the reset assert order).
>   */
>  static int k3_r5_rproc_unprepare(struct rproc *rproc)
>  {
> @@ -436,7 +465,9 @@ static int k3_r5_rproc_unprepare(struct rproc *rproc)
>  	struct device *dev = kproc->dev;
>  	int ret;
>  
> -	ret = (cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_LOCKSTEP) ?
> +	/* Re-use LockStep-mode reset logic for Single-CPU mode */
> +	ret = (cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_LOCKSTEP ||
> +	       cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_SINGLECPU) ?
>  		k3_r5_lockstep_reset(cluster) : k3_r5_split_reset(core);
>  	if (ret)
>  		dev_err(dev, "unable to disable cores, ret = %d\n", ret);
> @@ -455,6 +486,10 @@ static int k3_r5_rproc_unprepare(struct rproc *rproc)
>   * first followed by Core0. The Split-mode requires that Core0 to be maintained
>   * always in a higher power state that Core1 (implying Core1 needs to be started
>   * always only after Core0 is started).
> + *
> + * The Single-CPU mode on applicable SoCs (eg: AM64x) only uses Core0 to execute
> + * code, so only Core0 needs to be unhalted. The function uses the same logic
> + * flow as Split-mode for this.
>   */
>  static int k3_r5_rproc_start(struct rproc *rproc)
>  {
> @@ -539,6 +574,10 @@ static int k3_r5_rproc_start(struct rproc *rproc)
>   * Core0 to be maintained always in a higher power state that Core1 (implying
>   * Core1 needs to be stopped first before Core0).
>   *
> + * The Single-CPU mode on applicable SoCs (eg: AM64x) only uses Core0 to execute
> + * code, so only Core0 needs to be halted. The function uses the same logic
> + * flow as Split-mode for this.
> + *
>   * Note that the R5F halt operation in general is not effective when the R5F
>   * core is running, but is needed to make sure the core won't run after
>   * deasserting the reset the subsequent time. The asserting of reset can
> @@ -665,7 +704,9 @@ static const struct rproc_ops k3_r5_rproc_ops = {
>   *
>   * Each R5FSS has a cluster-level setting for configuring the processor
>   * subsystem either in a safety/fault-tolerant LockStep mode or a performance
> - * oriented Split mode. Each R5F core has a number of settings to either
> + * oriented Split mode on most SoCs. A fewer SoCs support a non-safety mode
> + * as an alternate for LockStep mode that exercises only a single R5F core
> + * called Single-CPU mode. Each R5F core has a number of settings to either
>   * enable/disable each of the TCMs, control which TCM appears at the R5F core's
>   * address 0x0. These settings need to be configured before the resets for the
>   * corresponding core are released. These settings are all protected and managed
> @@ -677,11 +718,13 @@ static const struct rproc_ops k3_r5_rproc_ops = {
>   * the cores are halted before the .prepare() step.
>   *
>   * The function is called from k3_r5_cluster_rproc_init() and is invoked either
> - * once (in LockStep mode) or twice (in Split mode). Support for LockStep-mode
> - * is dictated by an eFUSE register bit, and the config settings retrieved from
> - * DT are adjusted accordingly as per the permitted cluster mode. All cluster
> - * level settings like Cluster mode and TEINIT (exception handling state
> - * dictating ARM or Thumb mode) can only be set and retrieved using Core0.
> + * once (in LockStep mode or Single-CPU modes) or twice (in Split mode). Support
> + * for LockStep-mode is dictated by an eFUSE register bit, and the config
> + * settings retrieved from DT are adjusted accordingly as per the permitted
> + * cluster mode. Another eFUSE register bit dictates if the R5F cluster only
> + * supports a Single-CPU mode. All cluster level settings like Cluster mode and
> + * TEINIT (exception handling state dictating ARM or Thumb mode) can only be set
> + * and retrieved using Core0.
>   *
>   * The function behavior is different based on the cluster mode. The R5F cores
>   * are configured independently as per their individual settings in Split mode.
> @@ -700,10 +743,16 @@ static int k3_r5_rproc_configure(struct k3_r5_rproc *kproc)
>  	u32 set_cfg = 0, clr_cfg = 0;
>  	u64 boot_vec = 0;
>  	bool lockstep_en;
> +	bool single_cpu;
>  	int ret;
>  
>  	core0 = list_first_entry(&cluster->cores, struct k3_r5_core, elem);
> -	core = (cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_LOCKSTEP) ? core0 : kproc->core;
> +	if (cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_LOCKSTEP ||
> +	    cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_SINGLECPU) {
> +		core = core0;
> +	} else {
> +		core = kproc->core;
> +	}
>  
>  	ret = ti_sci_proc_get_status(core->tsp, &boot_vec, &cfg, &ctrl,
>  				     &stat);
> @@ -713,23 +762,48 @@ static int k3_r5_rproc_configure(struct k3_r5_rproc *kproc)
>  	dev_dbg(dev, "boot_vector = 0x%llx, cfg = 0x%x ctrl = 0x%x stat = 0x%x\n",
>  		boot_vec, cfg, ctrl, stat);
>  
> +	/* check if only Single-CPU mode is supported on applicable SoCs */
> +	if (cluster->soc_data->single_cpu_mode) {
> +		single_cpu =
> +			!!(stat & PROC_BOOT_STATUS_FLAG_R5_SINGLECORE_ONLY);
> +		if (single_cpu && cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_SPLIT) {
> +			dev_err(cluster->dev, "split-mode not permitted, force configuring for single-cpu mode\n");
> +			cluster->mode = CLUSTER_MODE_SINGLECPU;
> +		}
> +		goto config;
> +	}
> +
> +	/* check conventional LockStep vs Split mode configuration */
>  	lockstep_en = !!(stat & PROC_BOOT_STATUS_FLAG_R5_LOCKSTEP_PERMITTED);
>  	if (!lockstep_en && cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_LOCKSTEP) {
>  		dev_err(cluster->dev, "lockstep mode not permitted, force configuring for split-mode\n");
>  		cluster->mode = CLUSTER_MODE_SPLIT;
>  	}
>  
> +config:
>  	/* always enable ARM mode and set boot vector to 0 */
>  	boot_vec = 0x0;
>  	if (core == core0) {
>  		clr_cfg = PROC_BOOT_CFG_FLAG_R5_TEINIT;
> -		/*
> -		 * LockStep configuration bit is Read-only on Split-mode _only_
> -		 * devices and system firmware will NACK any requests with the
> -		 * bit configured, so program it only on permitted devices
> -		 */
> -		if (lockstep_en)
> -			clr_cfg |= PROC_BOOT_CFG_FLAG_R5_LOCKSTEP;
> +		if (cluster->soc_data->single_cpu_mode) {
> +			/*
> +			 * Single-CPU configuration bit can only be configured
> +			 * on Core0 and system firmware will NACK any requests
> +			 * with the bit configured, so program it only on
> +			 * permitted cores
> +			 */
> +			if (cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_SINGLECPU)
> +				set_cfg = PROC_BOOT_CFG_FLAG_R5_SINGLE_CORE;
> +		} else {
> +			/*
> +			 * LockStep configuration bit is Read-only on Split-mode
> +			 * _only_ devices and system firmware will NACK any
> +			 * requests with the bit configured, so program it only
> +			 * on permitted devices
> +			 */
> +			if (lockstep_en)
> +				clr_cfg |= PROC_BOOT_CFG_FLAG_R5_LOCKSTEP;
> +		}
>  	}
>  
>  	if (core->atcm_enable)
> @@ -894,12 +968,12 @@ static void k3_r5_reserved_mem_exit(struct k3_r5_rproc *kproc)
>   * cores are usable in Split-mode, but only the Core0 TCMs can be used in
>   * LockStep-mode. The newer revisions of the R5FSS IP maximizes these TCMs by
>   * leveraging the Core1 TCMs as well in certain modes where they would have
> - * otherwise been unusable (Eg: LockStep-mode on J7200 SoCs). This is done by
> - * making a Core1 TCM visible immediately after the corresponding Core0 TCM.
> - * The SoC memory map uses the larger 64 KB sizes for the Core0 TCMs, and the
> - * dts representation reflects this increased size on supported SoCs. The Core0
> - * TCM sizes therefore have to be adjusted to only half the original size in
> - * Split mode.
> + * otherwise been unusable (Eg: LockStep-mode on J7200 SoCs, Single-CPU mode on
> + * AM64x SoCs). This is done by making a Core1 TCM visible immediately after the
> + * corresponding Core0 TCM. The SoC memory map uses the larger 64 KB sizes for
> + * the Core0 TCMs, and the dts representation reflects this increased size on
> + * supported SoCs. The Core0 TCM sizes therefore have to be adjusted to only
> + * half the original size in Split mode.
>   */
>  static void k3_r5_adjust_tcm_sizes(struct k3_r5_rproc *kproc)
>  {
> @@ -909,6 +983,7 @@ static void k3_r5_adjust_tcm_sizes(struct k3_r5_rproc *kproc)
>  	struct k3_r5_core *core0;
>  
>  	if (cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_LOCKSTEP ||
> +	    cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_SINGLECPU ||
>  	    !cluster->soc_data->tcm_is_double)
>  		return;
>  
> @@ -987,8 +1062,9 @@ static int k3_r5_cluster_rproc_init(struct platform_device *pdev)
>  			goto err_add;
>  		}
>  
> -		/* create only one rproc in lockstep mode */
> -		if (cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_LOCKSTEP)
> +		/* create only one rproc in lockstep mode or single-cpu mode */
> +		if (cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_LOCKSTEP ||
> +		    cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_SINGLECPU)
>  			break;
>  	}
>  
> @@ -1020,11 +1096,12 @@ static void k3_r5_cluster_rproc_exit(void *data)
>  	struct rproc *rproc;
>  
>  	/*
> -	 * lockstep mode has only one rproc associated with first core, whereas
> -	 * split-mode has two rprocs associated with each core, and requires
> -	 * that core1 be powered down first
> +	 * lockstep mode and single-cpu modes have only one rproc associated
> +	 * with first core, whereas split-mode has two rprocs associated with
> +	 * each core, and requires that core1 be powered down first
>  	 */
> -	core = (cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_LOCKSTEP) ?
> +	core = (cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_LOCKSTEP ||
> +		cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_SINGLECPU) ?
>  		list_first_entry(&cluster->cores, struct k3_r5_core, elem) :
>  		list_last_entry(&cluster->cores, struct k3_r5_core, elem);
>  
> @@ -1396,7 +1473,12 @@ static int k3_r5_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>  		return -ENOMEM;
>  
>  	cluster->dev = dev;
> -	cluster->mode = CLUSTER_MODE_LOCKSTEP;
> +	/*
> +	 * default to most common efuse configurations - Split-mode on AM64x
> +	 * and LockStep-mode on all others
> +	 */
> +	cluster->mode = data->single_cpu_mode ?
> +				CLUSTER_MODE_SPLIT : CLUSTER_MODE_LOCKSTEP;
>  	cluster->soc_data = data;
>  	INIT_LIST_HEAD(&cluster->cores);
>  
> @@ -1450,17 +1532,26 @@ static int k3_r5_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>  static const struct k3_r5_soc_data am65_j721e_soc_data = {
>  	.tcm_is_double = false,
>  	.tcm_ecc_autoinit = false,
> +	.single_cpu_mode = false,
>  };
>  
>  static const struct k3_r5_soc_data j7200_soc_data = {
>  	.tcm_is_double = true,
>  	.tcm_ecc_autoinit = true,
> +	.single_cpu_mode = false,
> +};
> +
> +static const struct k3_r5_soc_data am64_soc_data = {
> +	.tcm_is_double = true,
> +	.tcm_ecc_autoinit = true,
> +	.single_cpu_mode = true,
>  };
>  
>  static const struct of_device_id k3_r5_of_match[] = {
>  	{ .compatible = "ti,am654-r5fss", .data = &am65_j721e_soc_data, },
>  	{ .compatible = "ti,j721e-r5fss", .data = &am65_j721e_soc_data, },
>  	{ .compatible = "ti,j7200-r5fss", .data = &j7200_soc_data, },
> +	{ .compatible = "ti,am64-r5fss",  .data = &am64_soc_data, },
>  	{ /* sentinel */ },
>  };
>  MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, k3_r5_of_match);
> -- 
> 2.30.1
> 

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

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] dt-bindings: remoteproc: k3-r5f: Update bindings for AM64x SoCs
  2021-03-27 14:31   ` Suman Anna
@ 2021-04-19 13:55     ` Suman Anna
  -1 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: Suman Anna @ 2021-04-19 13:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Bjorn Andersson, Mathieu Poirier, Rob Herring
  Cc: Lokesh Vutla, linux-remoteproc, devicetree, linux-arm-kernel,
	linux-kernel

Hi Rob,

On 3/27/21 9:31 AM, Suman Anna wrote:
> The K3 AM64x SoCs have two dual-core Arm R5F clusters/subsystems, with
> 2 R5F cores each, both in the MAIN voltage domain.
> 
> These clusters are a revised IP version compared to those present on
> J721E and J7200 SoCs, and supports a new "Single-CPU" mode instead of
> LockStep mode. Update the K3 R5F remoteproc bindings with the compatible
> info relevant to these R5F clusters/subsystems on K3 AM64x SoCs.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Suman Anna <s-anna@ti.com>
> ---
> v2: No changes
> 
>  .../bindings/remoteproc/ti,k3-r5f-rproc.yaml  | 31 ++++++++++++++++---

Looks like this patch has fallen through the cracks, can you please review and
give your ack for this patch so that Bjorn can pick up the series for 5.13?

regards
Suman

>  1 file changed, 26 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/ti,k3-r5f-rproc.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/ti,k3-r5f-rproc.yaml
> index d905d614502b..130fbaacc4b1 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/ti,k3-r5f-rproc.yaml
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/ti,k3-r5f-rproc.yaml
> @@ -14,8 +14,12 @@ description: |
>    processor subsystems/clusters (R5FSS). The dual core cluster can be used
>    either in a LockStep mode providing safety/fault tolerance features or in a
>    Split mode providing two individual compute cores for doubling the compute
> -  capacity. These are used together with other processors present on the SoC
> -  to achieve various system level goals.
> +  capacity on most SoCs. These are used together with other processors present
> +  on the SoC to achieve various system level goals.
> +
> +  AM64x SoCs do not support LockStep mode, but rather a new non-safety mode
> +  called "Single-CPU" mode, where only Core0 is used, but with ability to use
> +  Core1's TCMs as well.
>  
>    Each Dual-Core R5F sub-system is represented as a single DTS node
>    representing the cluster, with a pair of child DT nodes representing
> @@ -33,6 +37,7 @@ properties:
>        - ti,am654-r5fss
>        - ti,j721e-r5fss
>        - ti,j7200-r5fss
> +      - ti,am64-r5fss
>  
>    power-domains:
>      description: |
> @@ -56,11 +61,12 @@ properties:
>  
>    ti,cluster-mode:
>      $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/uint32
> -    enum: [0, 1]
>      description: |
>        Configuration Mode for the Dual R5F cores within the R5F cluster.
> -      Should be either a value of 1 (LockStep mode) or 0 (Split mode),
> -      default is LockStep mode if omitted.
> +      Should be either a value of 1 (LockStep mode) or 0 (Split mode) on
> +      most SoCs (AM65x, J721E, J7200), default is LockStep mode if omitted;
> +      and should be either a value of 0 (Split mode) or 2 (Single-CPU mode)
> +      on AM64x SoCs, default is Split mode if omitted.
>  
>  # R5F Processor Child Nodes:
>  # ==========================
> @@ -97,6 +103,7 @@ patternProperties:
>            - ti,am654-r5f
>            - ti,j721e-r5f
>            - ti,j7200-r5f
> +          - ti,am64-r5f
>  
>        reg:
>          items:
> @@ -198,6 +205,20 @@ patternProperties:
>  
>      unevaluatedProperties: false
>  
> +if:
> +  properties:
> +    compatible:
> +      enum:
> +        - ti,am64-r5fss
> +then:
> +  properties:
> +    ti,cluster-mode:
> +      enum: [0, 2]
> +else:
> +  properties:
> +    ti,cluster-mode:
> +      enum: [0, 1]
> +
>  required:
>    - compatible
>    - power-domains
> 


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] dt-bindings: remoteproc: k3-r5f: Update bindings for AM64x SoCs
@ 2021-04-19 13:55     ` Suman Anna
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: Suman Anna @ 2021-04-19 13:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Bjorn Andersson, Mathieu Poirier, Rob Herring
  Cc: Lokesh Vutla, linux-remoteproc, devicetree, linux-arm-kernel,
	linux-kernel

Hi Rob,

On 3/27/21 9:31 AM, Suman Anna wrote:
> The K3 AM64x SoCs have two dual-core Arm R5F clusters/subsystems, with
> 2 R5F cores each, both in the MAIN voltage domain.
> 
> These clusters are a revised IP version compared to those present on
> J721E and J7200 SoCs, and supports a new "Single-CPU" mode instead of
> LockStep mode. Update the K3 R5F remoteproc bindings with the compatible
> info relevant to these R5F clusters/subsystems on K3 AM64x SoCs.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Suman Anna <s-anna@ti.com>
> ---
> v2: No changes
> 
>  .../bindings/remoteproc/ti,k3-r5f-rproc.yaml  | 31 ++++++++++++++++---

Looks like this patch has fallen through the cracks, can you please review and
give your ack for this patch so that Bjorn can pick up the series for 5.13?

regards
Suman

>  1 file changed, 26 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/ti,k3-r5f-rproc.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/ti,k3-r5f-rproc.yaml
> index d905d614502b..130fbaacc4b1 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/ti,k3-r5f-rproc.yaml
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/ti,k3-r5f-rproc.yaml
> @@ -14,8 +14,12 @@ description: |
>    processor subsystems/clusters (R5FSS). The dual core cluster can be used
>    either in a LockStep mode providing safety/fault tolerance features or in a
>    Split mode providing two individual compute cores for doubling the compute
> -  capacity. These are used together with other processors present on the SoC
> -  to achieve various system level goals.
> +  capacity on most SoCs. These are used together with other processors present
> +  on the SoC to achieve various system level goals.
> +
> +  AM64x SoCs do not support LockStep mode, but rather a new non-safety mode
> +  called "Single-CPU" mode, where only Core0 is used, but with ability to use
> +  Core1's TCMs as well.
>  
>    Each Dual-Core R5F sub-system is represented as a single DTS node
>    representing the cluster, with a pair of child DT nodes representing
> @@ -33,6 +37,7 @@ properties:
>        - ti,am654-r5fss
>        - ti,j721e-r5fss
>        - ti,j7200-r5fss
> +      - ti,am64-r5fss
>  
>    power-domains:
>      description: |
> @@ -56,11 +61,12 @@ properties:
>  
>    ti,cluster-mode:
>      $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/uint32
> -    enum: [0, 1]
>      description: |
>        Configuration Mode for the Dual R5F cores within the R5F cluster.
> -      Should be either a value of 1 (LockStep mode) or 0 (Split mode),
> -      default is LockStep mode if omitted.
> +      Should be either a value of 1 (LockStep mode) or 0 (Split mode) on
> +      most SoCs (AM65x, J721E, J7200), default is LockStep mode if omitted;
> +      and should be either a value of 0 (Split mode) or 2 (Single-CPU mode)
> +      on AM64x SoCs, default is Split mode if omitted.
>  
>  # R5F Processor Child Nodes:
>  # ==========================
> @@ -97,6 +103,7 @@ patternProperties:
>            - ti,am654-r5f
>            - ti,j721e-r5f
>            - ti,j7200-r5f
> +          - ti,am64-r5f
>  
>        reg:
>          items:
> @@ -198,6 +205,20 @@ patternProperties:
>  
>      unevaluatedProperties: false
>  
> +if:
> +  properties:
> +    compatible:
> +      enum:
> +        - ti,am64-r5fss
> +then:
> +  properties:
> +    ti,cluster-mode:
> +      enum: [0, 2]
> +else:
> +  properties:
> +    ti,cluster-mode:
> +      enum: [0, 1]
> +
>  required:
>    - compatible
>    - power-domains
> 


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

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] dt-bindings: remoteproc: k3-r5f: Update bindings for AM64x SoCs
  2021-04-19 13:55     ` Suman Anna
@ 2021-05-13  2:47       ` Suman Anna
  -1 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: Suman Anna @ 2021-05-13  2:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Bjorn Andersson, Mathieu Poirier, Rob Herring
  Cc: Lokesh Vutla, linux-remoteproc, devicetree, linux-arm-kernel,
	linux-kernel

Hi Rob,

On 4/19/21 8:55 AM, Suman Anna wrote:
> Hi Rob,
> 
> On 3/27/21 9:31 AM, Suman Anna wrote:
>> The K3 AM64x SoCs have two dual-core Arm R5F clusters/subsystems, with
>> 2 R5F cores each, both in the MAIN voltage domain.
>>
>> These clusters are a revised IP version compared to those present on
>> J721E and J7200 SoCs, and supports a new "Single-CPU" mode instead of
>> LockStep mode. Update the K3 R5F remoteproc bindings with the compatible
>> info relevant to these R5F clusters/subsystems on K3 AM64x SoCs.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Suman Anna <s-anna@ti.com>
>> ---
>> v2: No changes
>>
>>  .../bindings/remoteproc/ti,k3-r5f-rproc.yaml  | 31 ++++++++++++++++---
> 
> Looks like this patch has fallen through the cracks, can you please review and
> give your ack for this patch so that Bjorn can pick up the series for 5.13?

Gentle reminder, do you have any comments on this patch. Appreciate your ack so
that we can get this in for 5.14?

regards
Suman

> 
> regards
> Suman
> 
>>  1 file changed, 26 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/ti,k3-r5f-rproc.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/ti,k3-r5f-rproc.yaml
>> index d905d614502b..130fbaacc4b1 100644
>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/ti,k3-r5f-rproc.yaml
>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/ti,k3-r5f-rproc.yaml
>> @@ -14,8 +14,12 @@ description: |
>>    processor subsystems/clusters (R5FSS). The dual core cluster can be used
>>    either in a LockStep mode providing safety/fault tolerance features or in a
>>    Split mode providing two individual compute cores for doubling the compute
>> -  capacity. These are used together with other processors present on the SoC
>> -  to achieve various system level goals.
>> +  capacity on most SoCs. These are used together with other processors present
>> +  on the SoC to achieve various system level goals.
>> +
>> +  AM64x SoCs do not support LockStep mode, but rather a new non-safety mode
>> +  called "Single-CPU" mode, where only Core0 is used, but with ability to use
>> +  Core1's TCMs as well.
>>  
>>    Each Dual-Core R5F sub-system is represented as a single DTS node
>>    representing the cluster, with a pair of child DT nodes representing
>> @@ -33,6 +37,7 @@ properties:
>>        - ti,am654-r5fss
>>        - ti,j721e-r5fss
>>        - ti,j7200-r5fss
>> +      - ti,am64-r5fss
>>  
>>    power-domains:
>>      description: |
>> @@ -56,11 +61,12 @@ properties:
>>  
>>    ti,cluster-mode:
>>      $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/uint32
>> -    enum: [0, 1]
>>      description: |
>>        Configuration Mode for the Dual R5F cores within the R5F cluster.
>> -      Should be either a value of 1 (LockStep mode) or 0 (Split mode),
>> -      default is LockStep mode if omitted.
>> +      Should be either a value of 1 (LockStep mode) or 0 (Split mode) on
>> +      most SoCs (AM65x, J721E, J7200), default is LockStep mode if omitted;
>> +      and should be either a value of 0 (Split mode) or 2 (Single-CPU mode)
>> +      on AM64x SoCs, default is Split mode if omitted.
>>  
>>  # R5F Processor Child Nodes:
>>  # ==========================
>> @@ -97,6 +103,7 @@ patternProperties:
>>            - ti,am654-r5f
>>            - ti,j721e-r5f
>>            - ti,j7200-r5f
>> +          - ti,am64-r5f
>>  
>>        reg:
>>          items:
>> @@ -198,6 +205,20 @@ patternProperties:
>>  
>>      unevaluatedProperties: false
>>  
>> +if:
>> +  properties:
>> +    compatible:
>> +      enum:
>> +        - ti,am64-r5fss
>> +then:
>> +  properties:
>> +    ti,cluster-mode:
>> +      enum: [0, 2]
>> +else:
>> +  properties:
>> +    ti,cluster-mode:
>> +      enum: [0, 1]
>> +
>>  required:
>>    - compatible
>>    - power-domains
>>
> 


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] dt-bindings: remoteproc: k3-r5f: Update bindings for AM64x SoCs
@ 2021-05-13  2:47       ` Suman Anna
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: Suman Anna @ 2021-05-13  2:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Bjorn Andersson, Mathieu Poirier, Rob Herring
  Cc: Lokesh Vutla, linux-remoteproc, devicetree, linux-arm-kernel,
	linux-kernel

Hi Rob,

On 4/19/21 8:55 AM, Suman Anna wrote:
> Hi Rob,
> 
> On 3/27/21 9:31 AM, Suman Anna wrote:
>> The K3 AM64x SoCs have two dual-core Arm R5F clusters/subsystems, with
>> 2 R5F cores each, both in the MAIN voltage domain.
>>
>> These clusters are a revised IP version compared to those present on
>> J721E and J7200 SoCs, and supports a new "Single-CPU" mode instead of
>> LockStep mode. Update the K3 R5F remoteproc bindings with the compatible
>> info relevant to these R5F clusters/subsystems on K3 AM64x SoCs.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Suman Anna <s-anna@ti.com>
>> ---
>> v2: No changes
>>
>>  .../bindings/remoteproc/ti,k3-r5f-rproc.yaml  | 31 ++++++++++++++++---
> 
> Looks like this patch has fallen through the cracks, can you please review and
> give your ack for this patch so that Bjorn can pick up the series for 5.13?

Gentle reminder, do you have any comments on this patch. Appreciate your ack so
that we can get this in for 5.14?

regards
Suman

> 
> regards
> Suman
> 
>>  1 file changed, 26 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/ti,k3-r5f-rproc.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/ti,k3-r5f-rproc.yaml
>> index d905d614502b..130fbaacc4b1 100644
>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/ti,k3-r5f-rproc.yaml
>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/ti,k3-r5f-rproc.yaml
>> @@ -14,8 +14,12 @@ description: |
>>    processor subsystems/clusters (R5FSS). The dual core cluster can be used
>>    either in a LockStep mode providing safety/fault tolerance features or in a
>>    Split mode providing two individual compute cores for doubling the compute
>> -  capacity. These are used together with other processors present on the SoC
>> -  to achieve various system level goals.
>> +  capacity on most SoCs. These are used together with other processors present
>> +  on the SoC to achieve various system level goals.
>> +
>> +  AM64x SoCs do not support LockStep mode, but rather a new non-safety mode
>> +  called "Single-CPU" mode, where only Core0 is used, but with ability to use
>> +  Core1's TCMs as well.
>>  
>>    Each Dual-Core R5F sub-system is represented as a single DTS node
>>    representing the cluster, with a pair of child DT nodes representing
>> @@ -33,6 +37,7 @@ properties:
>>        - ti,am654-r5fss
>>        - ti,j721e-r5fss
>>        - ti,j7200-r5fss
>> +      - ti,am64-r5fss
>>  
>>    power-domains:
>>      description: |
>> @@ -56,11 +61,12 @@ properties:
>>  
>>    ti,cluster-mode:
>>      $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/uint32
>> -    enum: [0, 1]
>>      description: |
>>        Configuration Mode for the Dual R5F cores within the R5F cluster.
>> -      Should be either a value of 1 (LockStep mode) or 0 (Split mode),
>> -      default is LockStep mode if omitted.
>> +      Should be either a value of 1 (LockStep mode) or 0 (Split mode) on
>> +      most SoCs (AM65x, J721E, J7200), default is LockStep mode if omitted;
>> +      and should be either a value of 0 (Split mode) or 2 (Single-CPU mode)
>> +      on AM64x SoCs, default is Split mode if omitted.
>>  
>>  # R5F Processor Child Nodes:
>>  # ==========================
>> @@ -97,6 +103,7 @@ patternProperties:
>>            - ti,am654-r5f
>>            - ti,j721e-r5f
>>            - ti,j7200-r5f
>> +          - ti,am64-r5f
>>  
>>        reg:
>>          items:
>> @@ -198,6 +205,20 @@ patternProperties:
>>  
>>      unevaluatedProperties: false
>>  
>> +if:
>> +  properties:
>> +    compatible:
>> +      enum:
>> +        - ti,am64-r5fss
>> +then:
>> +  properties:
>> +    ti,cluster-mode:
>> +      enum: [0, 2]
>> +else:
>> +  properties:
>> +    ti,cluster-mode:
>> +      enum: [0, 1]
>> +
>>  required:
>>    - compatible
>>    - power-domains
>>
> 


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

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] dt-bindings: remoteproc: k3-r5f: Update bindings for AM64x SoCs
  2021-05-13  2:47       ` Suman Anna
@ 2021-05-21 20:40         ` Mathieu Poirier
  -1 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: Mathieu Poirier @ 2021-05-21 20:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Suman Anna
  Cc: Bjorn Andersson, Rob Herring, Lokesh Vutla, linux-remoteproc,
	devicetree, linux-arm-kernel, linux-kernel

Hi suman,

On Wed, May 12, 2021 at 09:47:44PM -0500, Suman Anna wrote:
> Hi Rob,
> 
> On 4/19/21 8:55 AM, Suman Anna wrote:
> > Hi Rob,
> > 
> > On 3/27/21 9:31 AM, Suman Anna wrote:
> >> The K3 AM64x SoCs have two dual-core Arm R5F clusters/subsystems, with
> >> 2 R5F cores each, both in the MAIN voltage domain.
> >>
> >> These clusters are a revised IP version compared to those present on
> >> J721E and J7200 SoCs, and supports a new "Single-CPU" mode instead of
> >> LockStep mode. Update the K3 R5F remoteproc bindings with the compatible
> >> info relevant to these R5F clusters/subsystems on K3 AM64x SoCs.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Suman Anna <s-anna@ti.com>
> >> ---
> >> v2: No changes
> >>
> >>  .../bindings/remoteproc/ti,k3-r5f-rproc.yaml  | 31 ++++++++++++++++---
> > 
> > Looks like this patch has fallen through the cracks, can you please review and
> > give your ack for this patch so that Bjorn can pick up the series for 5.13?
> 
> Gentle reminder, do you have any comments on this patch. Appreciate your ack so
> that we can get this in for 5.14?

If memory serves me well Rob indicated that he would not review or comment on
bindings related to multi-core remote processors.  On the flip side he also
mentioned that he would not object to their presence.  And since this is an
increment to an existing binding rather than a new one, I think it is fair for
us to pick it up.  

Rob - please intervene if my recollections are not accurate and accept my honest
apologies.  Otherwise: 

Reviewed-by: Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@linaro.org>  

> 
> regards
> Suman
> 
> > 
> > regards
> > Suman
> > 
> >>  1 file changed, 26 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/ti,k3-r5f-rproc.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/ti,k3-r5f-rproc.yaml
> >> index d905d614502b..130fbaacc4b1 100644
> >> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/ti,k3-r5f-rproc.yaml
> >> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/ti,k3-r5f-rproc.yaml
> >> @@ -14,8 +14,12 @@ description: |
> >>    processor subsystems/clusters (R5FSS). The dual core cluster can be used
> >>    either in a LockStep mode providing safety/fault tolerance features or in a
> >>    Split mode providing two individual compute cores for doubling the compute
> >> -  capacity. These are used together with other processors present on the SoC
> >> -  to achieve various system level goals.
> >> +  capacity on most SoCs. These are used together with other processors present
> >> +  on the SoC to achieve various system level goals.
> >> +
> >> +  AM64x SoCs do not support LockStep mode, but rather a new non-safety mode
> >> +  called "Single-CPU" mode, where only Core0 is used, but with ability to use
> >> +  Core1's TCMs as well.
> >>  
> >>    Each Dual-Core R5F sub-system is represented as a single DTS node
> >>    representing the cluster, with a pair of child DT nodes representing
> >> @@ -33,6 +37,7 @@ properties:
> >>        - ti,am654-r5fss
> >>        - ti,j721e-r5fss
> >>        - ti,j7200-r5fss
> >> +      - ti,am64-r5fss
> >>  
> >>    power-domains:
> >>      description: |
> >> @@ -56,11 +61,12 @@ properties:
> >>  
> >>    ti,cluster-mode:
> >>      $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/uint32
> >> -    enum: [0, 1]
> >>      description: |
> >>        Configuration Mode for the Dual R5F cores within the R5F cluster.
> >> -      Should be either a value of 1 (LockStep mode) or 0 (Split mode),
> >> -      default is LockStep mode if omitted.
> >> +      Should be either a value of 1 (LockStep mode) or 0 (Split mode) on
> >> +      most SoCs (AM65x, J721E, J7200), default is LockStep mode if omitted;
> >> +      and should be either a value of 0 (Split mode) or 2 (Single-CPU mode)
> >> +      on AM64x SoCs, default is Split mode if omitted.
> >>  
> >>  # R5F Processor Child Nodes:
> >>  # ==========================
> >> @@ -97,6 +103,7 @@ patternProperties:
> >>            - ti,am654-r5f
> >>            - ti,j721e-r5f
> >>            - ti,j7200-r5f
> >> +          - ti,am64-r5f
> >>  
> >>        reg:
> >>          items:
> >> @@ -198,6 +205,20 @@ patternProperties:
> >>  
> >>      unevaluatedProperties: false
> >>  
> >> +if:
> >> +  properties:
> >> +    compatible:
> >> +      enum:
> >> +        - ti,am64-r5fss
> >> +then:
> >> +  properties:
> >> +    ti,cluster-mode:
> >> +      enum: [0, 2]
> >> +else:
> >> +  properties:
> >> +    ti,cluster-mode:
> >> +      enum: [0, 1]
> >> +
> >>  required:
> >>    - compatible
> >>    - power-domains
> >>
> > 
> 

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] dt-bindings: remoteproc: k3-r5f: Update bindings for AM64x SoCs
@ 2021-05-21 20:40         ` Mathieu Poirier
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: Mathieu Poirier @ 2021-05-21 20:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Suman Anna
  Cc: Bjorn Andersson, Rob Herring, Lokesh Vutla, linux-remoteproc,
	devicetree, linux-arm-kernel, linux-kernel

Hi suman,

On Wed, May 12, 2021 at 09:47:44PM -0500, Suman Anna wrote:
> Hi Rob,
> 
> On 4/19/21 8:55 AM, Suman Anna wrote:
> > Hi Rob,
> > 
> > On 3/27/21 9:31 AM, Suman Anna wrote:
> >> The K3 AM64x SoCs have two dual-core Arm R5F clusters/subsystems, with
> >> 2 R5F cores each, both in the MAIN voltage domain.
> >>
> >> These clusters are a revised IP version compared to those present on
> >> J721E and J7200 SoCs, and supports a new "Single-CPU" mode instead of
> >> LockStep mode. Update the K3 R5F remoteproc bindings with the compatible
> >> info relevant to these R5F clusters/subsystems on K3 AM64x SoCs.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Suman Anna <s-anna@ti.com>
> >> ---
> >> v2: No changes
> >>
> >>  .../bindings/remoteproc/ti,k3-r5f-rproc.yaml  | 31 ++++++++++++++++---
> > 
> > Looks like this patch has fallen through the cracks, can you please review and
> > give your ack for this patch so that Bjorn can pick up the series for 5.13?
> 
> Gentle reminder, do you have any comments on this patch. Appreciate your ack so
> that we can get this in for 5.14?

If memory serves me well Rob indicated that he would not review or comment on
bindings related to multi-core remote processors.  On the flip side he also
mentioned that he would not object to their presence.  And since this is an
increment to an existing binding rather than a new one, I think it is fair for
us to pick it up.  

Rob - please intervene if my recollections are not accurate and accept my honest
apologies.  Otherwise: 

Reviewed-by: Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@linaro.org>  

> 
> regards
> Suman
> 
> > 
> > regards
> > Suman
> > 
> >>  1 file changed, 26 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/ti,k3-r5f-rproc.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/ti,k3-r5f-rproc.yaml
> >> index d905d614502b..130fbaacc4b1 100644
> >> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/ti,k3-r5f-rproc.yaml
> >> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/ti,k3-r5f-rproc.yaml
> >> @@ -14,8 +14,12 @@ description: |
> >>    processor subsystems/clusters (R5FSS). The dual core cluster can be used
> >>    either in a LockStep mode providing safety/fault tolerance features or in a
> >>    Split mode providing two individual compute cores for doubling the compute
> >> -  capacity. These are used together with other processors present on the SoC
> >> -  to achieve various system level goals.
> >> +  capacity on most SoCs. These are used together with other processors present
> >> +  on the SoC to achieve various system level goals.
> >> +
> >> +  AM64x SoCs do not support LockStep mode, but rather a new non-safety mode
> >> +  called "Single-CPU" mode, where only Core0 is used, but with ability to use
> >> +  Core1's TCMs as well.
> >>  
> >>    Each Dual-Core R5F sub-system is represented as a single DTS node
> >>    representing the cluster, with a pair of child DT nodes representing
> >> @@ -33,6 +37,7 @@ properties:
> >>        - ti,am654-r5fss
> >>        - ti,j721e-r5fss
> >>        - ti,j7200-r5fss
> >> +      - ti,am64-r5fss
> >>  
> >>    power-domains:
> >>      description: |
> >> @@ -56,11 +61,12 @@ properties:
> >>  
> >>    ti,cluster-mode:
> >>      $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/uint32
> >> -    enum: [0, 1]
> >>      description: |
> >>        Configuration Mode for the Dual R5F cores within the R5F cluster.
> >> -      Should be either a value of 1 (LockStep mode) or 0 (Split mode),
> >> -      default is LockStep mode if omitted.
> >> +      Should be either a value of 1 (LockStep mode) or 0 (Split mode) on
> >> +      most SoCs (AM65x, J721E, J7200), default is LockStep mode if omitted;
> >> +      and should be either a value of 0 (Split mode) or 2 (Single-CPU mode)
> >> +      on AM64x SoCs, default is Split mode if omitted.
> >>  
> >>  # R5F Processor Child Nodes:
> >>  # ==========================
> >> @@ -97,6 +103,7 @@ patternProperties:
> >>            - ti,am654-r5f
> >>            - ti,j721e-r5f
> >>            - ti,j7200-r5f
> >> +          - ti,am64-r5f
> >>  
> >>        reg:
> >>          items:
> >> @@ -198,6 +205,20 @@ patternProperties:
> >>  
> >>      unevaluatedProperties: false
> >>  
> >> +if:
> >> +  properties:
> >> +    compatible:
> >> +      enum:
> >> +        - ti,am64-r5fss
> >> +then:
> >> +  properties:
> >> +    ti,cluster-mode:
> >> +      enum: [0, 2]
> >> +else:
> >> +  properties:
> >> +    ti,cluster-mode:
> >> +      enum: [0, 1]
> >> +
> >>  required:
> >>    - compatible
> >>    - power-domains
> >>
> > 
> 

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

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] dt-bindings: remoteproc: k3-r5f: Update bindings for AM64x SoCs
  2021-05-21 20:40         ` Mathieu Poirier
@ 2021-05-24 15:47           ` Suman Anna
  -1 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: Suman Anna @ 2021-05-24 15:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Mathieu Poirier, Bjorn Andersson
  Cc: Rob Herring, Lokesh Vutla, linux-remoteproc, devicetree,
	linux-arm-kernel, linux-kernel

On 5/21/21 3:40 PM, Mathieu Poirier wrote:
> Hi suman,
> 
> On Wed, May 12, 2021 at 09:47:44PM -0500, Suman Anna wrote:
>> Hi Rob,
>>
>> On 4/19/21 8:55 AM, Suman Anna wrote:
>>> Hi Rob,
>>>
>>> On 3/27/21 9:31 AM, Suman Anna wrote:
>>>> The K3 AM64x SoCs have two dual-core Arm R5F clusters/subsystems, with
>>>> 2 R5F cores each, both in the MAIN voltage domain.
>>>>
>>>> These clusters are a revised IP version compared to those present on
>>>> J721E and J7200 SoCs, and supports a new "Single-CPU" mode instead of
>>>> LockStep mode. Update the K3 R5F remoteproc bindings with the compatible
>>>> info relevant to these R5F clusters/subsystems on K3 AM64x SoCs.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Suman Anna <s-anna@ti.com>
>>>> ---
>>>> v2: No changes
>>>>
>>>>  .../bindings/remoteproc/ti,k3-r5f-rproc.yaml  | 31 ++++++++++++++++---
>>>
>>> Looks like this patch has fallen through the cracks, can you please review and
>>> give your ack for this patch so that Bjorn can pick up the series for 5.13?
>>
>> Gentle reminder, do you have any comments on this patch. Appreciate your ack so
>> that we can get this in for 5.14?
> 
> If memory serves me well Rob indicated that he would not review or comment on
> bindings related to multi-core remote processors.  On the flip side he also
> mentioned that he would not object to their presence.  And since this is an
> increment to an existing binding rather than a new one, I think it is fair for
> us to pick it up.  
> 
> Rob - please intervene if my recollections are not accurate and accept my honest
> apologies.  Otherwise: 
> 
> Reviewed-by: Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@linaro.org> 
> 

Thank you Mathieu.

Bjorn,
Is it possible for you to give an immutable branch with just this bindings so we
can add the R5F nodes as well and avoid any checkpatch warnings on Nishanth's
tree with our K3 dts patches?

regards
Suman

>>
>> regards
>> Suman
>>
>>>
>>> regards
>>> Suman
>>>
>>>>  1 file changed, 26 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/ti,k3-r5f-rproc.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/ti,k3-r5f-rproc.yaml
>>>> index d905d614502b..130fbaacc4b1 100644
>>>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/ti,k3-r5f-rproc.yaml
>>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/ti,k3-r5f-rproc.yaml
>>>> @@ -14,8 +14,12 @@ description: |
>>>>    processor subsystems/clusters (R5FSS). The dual core cluster can be used
>>>>    either in a LockStep mode providing safety/fault tolerance features or in a
>>>>    Split mode providing two individual compute cores for doubling the compute
>>>> -  capacity. These are used together with other processors present on the SoC
>>>> -  to achieve various system level goals.
>>>> +  capacity on most SoCs. These are used together with other processors present
>>>> +  on the SoC to achieve various system level goals.
>>>> +
>>>> +  AM64x SoCs do not support LockStep mode, but rather a new non-safety mode
>>>> +  called "Single-CPU" mode, where only Core0 is used, but with ability to use
>>>> +  Core1's TCMs as well.
>>>>  
>>>>    Each Dual-Core R5F sub-system is represented as a single DTS node
>>>>    representing the cluster, with a pair of child DT nodes representing
>>>> @@ -33,6 +37,7 @@ properties:
>>>>        - ti,am654-r5fss
>>>>        - ti,j721e-r5fss
>>>>        - ti,j7200-r5fss
>>>> +      - ti,am64-r5fss
>>>>  
>>>>    power-domains:
>>>>      description: |
>>>> @@ -56,11 +61,12 @@ properties:
>>>>  
>>>>    ti,cluster-mode:
>>>>      $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/uint32
>>>> -    enum: [0, 1]
>>>>      description: |
>>>>        Configuration Mode for the Dual R5F cores within the R5F cluster.
>>>> -      Should be either a value of 1 (LockStep mode) or 0 (Split mode),
>>>> -      default is LockStep mode if omitted.
>>>> +      Should be either a value of 1 (LockStep mode) or 0 (Split mode) on
>>>> +      most SoCs (AM65x, J721E, J7200), default is LockStep mode if omitted;
>>>> +      and should be either a value of 0 (Split mode) or 2 (Single-CPU mode)
>>>> +      on AM64x SoCs, default is Split mode if omitted.
>>>>  
>>>>  # R5F Processor Child Nodes:
>>>>  # ==========================
>>>> @@ -97,6 +103,7 @@ patternProperties:
>>>>            - ti,am654-r5f
>>>>            - ti,j721e-r5f
>>>>            - ti,j7200-r5f
>>>> +          - ti,am64-r5f
>>>>  
>>>>        reg:
>>>>          items:
>>>> @@ -198,6 +205,20 @@ patternProperties:
>>>>  
>>>>      unevaluatedProperties: false
>>>>  
>>>> +if:
>>>> +  properties:
>>>> +    compatible:
>>>> +      enum:
>>>> +        - ti,am64-r5fss
>>>> +then:
>>>> +  properties:
>>>> +    ti,cluster-mode:
>>>> +      enum: [0, 2]
>>>> +else:
>>>> +  properties:
>>>> +    ti,cluster-mode:
>>>> +      enum: [0, 1]
>>>> +
>>>>  required:
>>>>    - compatible
>>>>    - power-domains
>>>>
>>>
>>


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] dt-bindings: remoteproc: k3-r5f: Update bindings for AM64x SoCs
@ 2021-05-24 15:47           ` Suman Anna
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: Suman Anna @ 2021-05-24 15:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Mathieu Poirier, Bjorn Andersson
  Cc: Rob Herring, Lokesh Vutla, linux-remoteproc, devicetree,
	linux-arm-kernel, linux-kernel

On 5/21/21 3:40 PM, Mathieu Poirier wrote:
> Hi suman,
> 
> On Wed, May 12, 2021 at 09:47:44PM -0500, Suman Anna wrote:
>> Hi Rob,
>>
>> On 4/19/21 8:55 AM, Suman Anna wrote:
>>> Hi Rob,
>>>
>>> On 3/27/21 9:31 AM, Suman Anna wrote:
>>>> The K3 AM64x SoCs have two dual-core Arm R5F clusters/subsystems, with
>>>> 2 R5F cores each, both in the MAIN voltage domain.
>>>>
>>>> These clusters are a revised IP version compared to those present on
>>>> J721E and J7200 SoCs, and supports a new "Single-CPU" mode instead of
>>>> LockStep mode. Update the K3 R5F remoteproc bindings with the compatible
>>>> info relevant to these R5F clusters/subsystems on K3 AM64x SoCs.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Suman Anna <s-anna@ti.com>
>>>> ---
>>>> v2: No changes
>>>>
>>>>  .../bindings/remoteproc/ti,k3-r5f-rproc.yaml  | 31 ++++++++++++++++---
>>>
>>> Looks like this patch has fallen through the cracks, can you please review and
>>> give your ack for this patch so that Bjorn can pick up the series for 5.13?
>>
>> Gentle reminder, do you have any comments on this patch. Appreciate your ack so
>> that we can get this in for 5.14?
> 
> If memory serves me well Rob indicated that he would not review or comment on
> bindings related to multi-core remote processors.  On the flip side he also
> mentioned that he would not object to their presence.  And since this is an
> increment to an existing binding rather than a new one, I think it is fair for
> us to pick it up.  
> 
> Rob - please intervene if my recollections are not accurate and accept my honest
> apologies.  Otherwise: 
> 
> Reviewed-by: Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@linaro.org> 
> 

Thank you Mathieu.

Bjorn,
Is it possible for you to give an immutable branch with just this bindings so we
can add the R5F nodes as well and avoid any checkpatch warnings on Nishanth's
tree with our K3 dts patches?

regards
Suman

>>
>> regards
>> Suman
>>
>>>
>>> regards
>>> Suman
>>>
>>>>  1 file changed, 26 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/ti,k3-r5f-rproc.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/ti,k3-r5f-rproc.yaml
>>>> index d905d614502b..130fbaacc4b1 100644
>>>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/ti,k3-r5f-rproc.yaml
>>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/ti,k3-r5f-rproc.yaml
>>>> @@ -14,8 +14,12 @@ description: |
>>>>    processor subsystems/clusters (R5FSS). The dual core cluster can be used
>>>>    either in a LockStep mode providing safety/fault tolerance features or in a
>>>>    Split mode providing two individual compute cores for doubling the compute
>>>> -  capacity. These are used together with other processors present on the SoC
>>>> -  to achieve various system level goals.
>>>> +  capacity on most SoCs. These are used together with other processors present
>>>> +  on the SoC to achieve various system level goals.
>>>> +
>>>> +  AM64x SoCs do not support LockStep mode, but rather a new non-safety mode
>>>> +  called "Single-CPU" mode, where only Core0 is used, but with ability to use
>>>> +  Core1's TCMs as well.
>>>>  
>>>>    Each Dual-Core R5F sub-system is represented as a single DTS node
>>>>    representing the cluster, with a pair of child DT nodes representing
>>>> @@ -33,6 +37,7 @@ properties:
>>>>        - ti,am654-r5fss
>>>>        - ti,j721e-r5fss
>>>>        - ti,j7200-r5fss
>>>> +      - ti,am64-r5fss
>>>>  
>>>>    power-domains:
>>>>      description: |
>>>> @@ -56,11 +61,12 @@ properties:
>>>>  
>>>>    ti,cluster-mode:
>>>>      $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/uint32
>>>> -    enum: [0, 1]
>>>>      description: |
>>>>        Configuration Mode for the Dual R5F cores within the R5F cluster.
>>>> -      Should be either a value of 1 (LockStep mode) or 0 (Split mode),
>>>> -      default is LockStep mode if omitted.
>>>> +      Should be either a value of 1 (LockStep mode) or 0 (Split mode) on
>>>> +      most SoCs (AM65x, J721E, J7200), default is LockStep mode if omitted;
>>>> +      and should be either a value of 0 (Split mode) or 2 (Single-CPU mode)
>>>> +      on AM64x SoCs, default is Split mode if omitted.
>>>>  
>>>>  # R5F Processor Child Nodes:
>>>>  # ==========================
>>>> @@ -97,6 +103,7 @@ patternProperties:
>>>>            - ti,am654-r5f
>>>>            - ti,j721e-r5f
>>>>            - ti,j7200-r5f
>>>> +          - ti,am64-r5f
>>>>  
>>>>        reg:
>>>>          items:
>>>> @@ -198,6 +205,20 @@ patternProperties:
>>>>  
>>>>      unevaluatedProperties: false
>>>>  
>>>> +if:
>>>> +  properties:
>>>> +    compatible:
>>>> +      enum:
>>>> +        - ti,am64-r5fss
>>>> +then:
>>>> +  properties:
>>>> +    ti,cluster-mode:
>>>> +      enum: [0, 2]
>>>> +else:
>>>> +  properties:
>>>> +    ti,cluster-mode:
>>>> +      enum: [0, 1]
>>>> +
>>>>  required:
>>>>    - compatible
>>>>    - power-domains
>>>>
>>>
>>


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

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] dt-bindings: remoteproc: k3-r5f: Update bindings for AM64x SoCs
  2021-05-24 15:47           ` Suman Anna
@ 2021-05-28  3:17             ` Bjorn Andersson
  -1 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: Bjorn Andersson @ 2021-05-28  3:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Suman Anna
  Cc: Mathieu Poirier, Rob Herring, Lokesh Vutla, linux-remoteproc,
	devicetree, linux-arm-kernel, linux-kernel

On Mon 24 May 10:47 CDT 2021, Suman Anna wrote:

> On 5/21/21 3:40 PM, Mathieu Poirier wrote:
> > Hi suman,
> > 
> > On Wed, May 12, 2021 at 09:47:44PM -0500, Suman Anna wrote:
> >> Hi Rob,
> >>
> >> On 4/19/21 8:55 AM, Suman Anna wrote:
> >>> Hi Rob,
> >>>
> >>> On 3/27/21 9:31 AM, Suman Anna wrote:
> >>>> The K3 AM64x SoCs have two dual-core Arm R5F clusters/subsystems, with
> >>>> 2 R5F cores each, both in the MAIN voltage domain.
> >>>>
> >>>> These clusters are a revised IP version compared to those present on
> >>>> J721E and J7200 SoCs, and supports a new "Single-CPU" mode instead of
> >>>> LockStep mode. Update the K3 R5F remoteproc bindings with the compatible
> >>>> info relevant to these R5F clusters/subsystems on K3 AM64x SoCs.
> >>>>
> >>>> Signed-off-by: Suman Anna <s-anna@ti.com>
> >>>> ---
> >>>> v2: No changes
> >>>>
> >>>>  .../bindings/remoteproc/ti,k3-r5f-rproc.yaml  | 31 ++++++++++++++++---
> >>>
> >>> Looks like this patch has fallen through the cracks, can you please review and
> >>> give your ack for this patch so that Bjorn can pick up the series for 5.13?
> >>
> >> Gentle reminder, do you have any comments on this patch. Appreciate your ack so
> >> that we can get this in for 5.14?
> > 
> > If memory serves me well Rob indicated that he would not review or comment on
> > bindings related to multi-core remote processors.  On the flip side he also
> > mentioned that he would not object to their presence.  And since this is an
> > increment to an existing binding rather than a new one, I think it is fair for
> > us to pick it up.  
> > 
> > Rob - please intervene if my recollections are not accurate and accept my honest
> > apologies.  Otherwise: 
> > 
> > Reviewed-by: Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@linaro.org> 
> > 
> 
> Thank you Mathieu.
> 
> Bjorn,
> Is it possible for you to give an immutable branch with just this bindings so we
> can add the R5F nodes as well and avoid any checkpatch warnings on Nishanth's
> tree with our K3 dts patches?
> 

Hi Suman,

That sounds rather ambitious, but you can now find this at:
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/andersson/remoteproc.git/tag/?h=20210327143117.1840-2-s-anna@ti.com

Regards,
Bjorn

> regards
> Suman
> 
> >>
> >> regards
> >> Suman
> >>
> >>>
> >>> regards
> >>> Suman
> >>>
> >>>>  1 file changed, 26 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> >>>>
> >>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/ti,k3-r5f-rproc.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/ti,k3-r5f-rproc.yaml
> >>>> index d905d614502b..130fbaacc4b1 100644
> >>>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/ti,k3-r5f-rproc.yaml
> >>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/ti,k3-r5f-rproc.yaml
> >>>> @@ -14,8 +14,12 @@ description: |
> >>>>    processor subsystems/clusters (R5FSS). The dual core cluster can be used
> >>>>    either in a LockStep mode providing safety/fault tolerance features or in a
> >>>>    Split mode providing two individual compute cores for doubling the compute
> >>>> -  capacity. These are used together with other processors present on the SoC
> >>>> -  to achieve various system level goals.
> >>>> +  capacity on most SoCs. These are used together with other processors present
> >>>> +  on the SoC to achieve various system level goals.
> >>>> +
> >>>> +  AM64x SoCs do not support LockStep mode, but rather a new non-safety mode
> >>>> +  called "Single-CPU" mode, where only Core0 is used, but with ability to use
> >>>> +  Core1's TCMs as well.
> >>>>  
> >>>>    Each Dual-Core R5F sub-system is represented as a single DTS node
> >>>>    representing the cluster, with a pair of child DT nodes representing
> >>>> @@ -33,6 +37,7 @@ properties:
> >>>>        - ti,am654-r5fss
> >>>>        - ti,j721e-r5fss
> >>>>        - ti,j7200-r5fss
> >>>> +      - ti,am64-r5fss
> >>>>  
> >>>>    power-domains:
> >>>>      description: |
> >>>> @@ -56,11 +61,12 @@ properties:
> >>>>  
> >>>>    ti,cluster-mode:
> >>>>      $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/uint32
> >>>> -    enum: [0, 1]
> >>>>      description: |
> >>>>        Configuration Mode for the Dual R5F cores within the R5F cluster.
> >>>> -      Should be either a value of 1 (LockStep mode) or 0 (Split mode),
> >>>> -      default is LockStep mode if omitted.
> >>>> +      Should be either a value of 1 (LockStep mode) or 0 (Split mode) on
> >>>> +      most SoCs (AM65x, J721E, J7200), default is LockStep mode if omitted;
> >>>> +      and should be either a value of 0 (Split mode) or 2 (Single-CPU mode)
> >>>> +      on AM64x SoCs, default is Split mode if omitted.
> >>>>  
> >>>>  # R5F Processor Child Nodes:
> >>>>  # ==========================
> >>>> @@ -97,6 +103,7 @@ patternProperties:
> >>>>            - ti,am654-r5f
> >>>>            - ti,j721e-r5f
> >>>>            - ti,j7200-r5f
> >>>> +          - ti,am64-r5f
> >>>>  
> >>>>        reg:
> >>>>          items:
> >>>> @@ -198,6 +205,20 @@ patternProperties:
> >>>>  
> >>>>      unevaluatedProperties: false
> >>>>  
> >>>> +if:
> >>>> +  properties:
> >>>> +    compatible:
> >>>> +      enum:
> >>>> +        - ti,am64-r5fss
> >>>> +then:
> >>>> +  properties:
> >>>> +    ti,cluster-mode:
> >>>> +      enum: [0, 2]
> >>>> +else:
> >>>> +  properties:
> >>>> +    ti,cluster-mode:
> >>>> +      enum: [0, 1]
> >>>> +
> >>>>  required:
> >>>>    - compatible
> >>>>    - power-domains
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>
> 

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] dt-bindings: remoteproc: k3-r5f: Update bindings for AM64x SoCs
@ 2021-05-28  3:17             ` Bjorn Andersson
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: Bjorn Andersson @ 2021-05-28  3:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Suman Anna
  Cc: Mathieu Poirier, Rob Herring, Lokesh Vutla, linux-remoteproc,
	devicetree, linux-arm-kernel, linux-kernel

On Mon 24 May 10:47 CDT 2021, Suman Anna wrote:

> On 5/21/21 3:40 PM, Mathieu Poirier wrote:
> > Hi suman,
> > 
> > On Wed, May 12, 2021 at 09:47:44PM -0500, Suman Anna wrote:
> >> Hi Rob,
> >>
> >> On 4/19/21 8:55 AM, Suman Anna wrote:
> >>> Hi Rob,
> >>>
> >>> On 3/27/21 9:31 AM, Suman Anna wrote:
> >>>> The K3 AM64x SoCs have two dual-core Arm R5F clusters/subsystems, with
> >>>> 2 R5F cores each, both in the MAIN voltage domain.
> >>>>
> >>>> These clusters are a revised IP version compared to those present on
> >>>> J721E and J7200 SoCs, and supports a new "Single-CPU" mode instead of
> >>>> LockStep mode. Update the K3 R5F remoteproc bindings with the compatible
> >>>> info relevant to these R5F clusters/subsystems on K3 AM64x SoCs.
> >>>>
> >>>> Signed-off-by: Suman Anna <s-anna@ti.com>
> >>>> ---
> >>>> v2: No changes
> >>>>
> >>>>  .../bindings/remoteproc/ti,k3-r5f-rproc.yaml  | 31 ++++++++++++++++---
> >>>
> >>> Looks like this patch has fallen through the cracks, can you please review and
> >>> give your ack for this patch so that Bjorn can pick up the series for 5.13?
> >>
> >> Gentle reminder, do you have any comments on this patch. Appreciate your ack so
> >> that we can get this in for 5.14?
> > 
> > If memory serves me well Rob indicated that he would not review or comment on
> > bindings related to multi-core remote processors.  On the flip side he also
> > mentioned that he would not object to their presence.  And since this is an
> > increment to an existing binding rather than a new one, I think it is fair for
> > us to pick it up.  
> > 
> > Rob - please intervene if my recollections are not accurate and accept my honest
> > apologies.  Otherwise: 
> > 
> > Reviewed-by: Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@linaro.org> 
> > 
> 
> Thank you Mathieu.
> 
> Bjorn,
> Is it possible for you to give an immutable branch with just this bindings so we
> can add the R5F nodes as well and avoid any checkpatch warnings on Nishanth's
> tree with our K3 dts patches?
> 

Hi Suman,

That sounds rather ambitious, but you can now find this at:
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/andersson/remoteproc.git/tag/?h=20210327143117.1840-2-s-anna@ti.com

Regards,
Bjorn

> regards
> Suman
> 
> >>
> >> regards
> >> Suman
> >>
> >>>
> >>> regards
> >>> Suman
> >>>
> >>>>  1 file changed, 26 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> >>>>
> >>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/ti,k3-r5f-rproc.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/ti,k3-r5f-rproc.yaml
> >>>> index d905d614502b..130fbaacc4b1 100644
> >>>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/ti,k3-r5f-rproc.yaml
> >>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/ti,k3-r5f-rproc.yaml
> >>>> @@ -14,8 +14,12 @@ description: |
> >>>>    processor subsystems/clusters (R5FSS). The dual core cluster can be used
> >>>>    either in a LockStep mode providing safety/fault tolerance features or in a
> >>>>    Split mode providing two individual compute cores for doubling the compute
> >>>> -  capacity. These are used together with other processors present on the SoC
> >>>> -  to achieve various system level goals.
> >>>> +  capacity on most SoCs. These are used together with other processors present
> >>>> +  on the SoC to achieve various system level goals.
> >>>> +
> >>>> +  AM64x SoCs do not support LockStep mode, but rather a new non-safety mode
> >>>> +  called "Single-CPU" mode, where only Core0 is used, but with ability to use
> >>>> +  Core1's TCMs as well.
> >>>>  
> >>>>    Each Dual-Core R5F sub-system is represented as a single DTS node
> >>>>    representing the cluster, with a pair of child DT nodes representing
> >>>> @@ -33,6 +37,7 @@ properties:
> >>>>        - ti,am654-r5fss
> >>>>        - ti,j721e-r5fss
> >>>>        - ti,j7200-r5fss
> >>>> +      - ti,am64-r5fss
> >>>>  
> >>>>    power-domains:
> >>>>      description: |
> >>>> @@ -56,11 +61,12 @@ properties:
> >>>>  
> >>>>    ti,cluster-mode:
> >>>>      $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/uint32
> >>>> -    enum: [0, 1]
> >>>>      description: |
> >>>>        Configuration Mode for the Dual R5F cores within the R5F cluster.
> >>>> -      Should be either a value of 1 (LockStep mode) or 0 (Split mode),
> >>>> -      default is LockStep mode if omitted.
> >>>> +      Should be either a value of 1 (LockStep mode) or 0 (Split mode) on
> >>>> +      most SoCs (AM65x, J721E, J7200), default is LockStep mode if omitted;
> >>>> +      and should be either a value of 0 (Split mode) or 2 (Single-CPU mode)
> >>>> +      on AM64x SoCs, default is Split mode if omitted.
> >>>>  
> >>>>  # R5F Processor Child Nodes:
> >>>>  # ==========================
> >>>> @@ -97,6 +103,7 @@ patternProperties:
> >>>>            - ti,am654-r5f
> >>>>            - ti,j721e-r5f
> >>>>            - ti,j7200-r5f
> >>>> +          - ti,am64-r5f
> >>>>  
> >>>>        reg:
> >>>>          items:
> >>>> @@ -198,6 +205,20 @@ patternProperties:
> >>>>  
> >>>>      unevaluatedProperties: false
> >>>>  
> >>>> +if:
> >>>> +  properties:
> >>>> +    compatible:
> >>>> +      enum:
> >>>> +        - ti,am64-r5fss
> >>>> +then:
> >>>> +  properties:
> >>>> +    ti,cluster-mode:
> >>>> +      enum: [0, 2]
> >>>> +else:
> >>>> +  properties:
> >>>> +    ti,cluster-mode:
> >>>> +      enum: [0, 1]
> >>>> +
> >>>>  required:
> >>>>    - compatible
> >>>>    - power-domains
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>
> 

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

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] dt-bindings: remoteproc: k3-r5f: Update bindings for AM64x SoCs
  2021-05-28  3:17             ` Bjorn Andersson
@ 2021-05-28 12:06               ` Suman Anna
  -1 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: Suman Anna @ 2021-05-28 12:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Bjorn Andersson
  Cc: Mathieu Poirier, Rob Herring, Lokesh Vutla, linux-remoteproc,
	devicetree, linux-arm-kernel, linux-kernel

On 5/27/21 10:17 PM, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
> On Mon 24 May 10:47 CDT 2021, Suman Anna wrote:
> 
>> On 5/21/21 3:40 PM, Mathieu Poirier wrote:
>>> Hi suman,
>>>
>>> On Wed, May 12, 2021 at 09:47:44PM -0500, Suman Anna wrote:
>>>> Hi Rob,
>>>>
>>>> On 4/19/21 8:55 AM, Suman Anna wrote:
>>>>> Hi Rob,
>>>>>
>>>>> On 3/27/21 9:31 AM, Suman Anna wrote:
>>>>>> The K3 AM64x SoCs have two dual-core Arm R5F clusters/subsystems, with
>>>>>> 2 R5F cores each, both in the MAIN voltage domain.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> These clusters are a revised IP version compared to those present on
>>>>>> J721E and J7200 SoCs, and supports a new "Single-CPU" mode instead of
>>>>>> LockStep mode. Update the K3 R5F remoteproc bindings with the compatible
>>>>>> info relevant to these R5F clusters/subsystems on K3 AM64x SoCs.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Suman Anna <s-anna@ti.com>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>> v2: No changes
>>>>>>
>>>>>>  .../bindings/remoteproc/ti,k3-r5f-rproc.yaml  | 31 ++++++++++++++++---
>>>>>
>>>>> Looks like this patch has fallen through the cracks, can you please review and
>>>>> give your ack for this patch so that Bjorn can pick up the series for 5.13?
>>>>
>>>> Gentle reminder, do you have any comments on this patch. Appreciate your ack so
>>>> that we can get this in for 5.14?
>>>
>>> If memory serves me well Rob indicated that he would not review or comment on
>>> bindings related to multi-core remote processors.  On the flip side he also
>>> mentioned that he would not object to their presence.  And since this is an
>>> increment to an existing binding rather than a new one, I think it is fair for
>>> us to pick it up.  
>>>
>>> Rob - please intervene if my recollections are not accurate and accept my honest
>>> apologies.  Otherwise: 
>>>
>>> Reviewed-by: Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@linaro.org> 
>>>
>>
>> Thank you Mathieu.
>>
>> Bjorn,
>> Is it possible for you to give an immutable branch with just this bindings so we
>> can add the R5F nodes as well and avoid any checkpatch warnings on Nishanth's
>> tree with our K3 dts patches?
>>
> 
> Hi Suman,
> 
> That sounds rather ambitious, but you can now find this at:
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/andersson/remoteproc.git/tag/?h=20210327143117.1840-2-s-anna@ti.com

Thanks a lot Bjorn. Appreciate this a lot.

regards
Suman

> 
> Regards,
> Bjorn
> 
>> regards
>> Suman
>>
>>>>
>>>> regards
>>>> Suman
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> regards
>>>>> Suman
>>>>>
>>>>>>  1 file changed, 26 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/ti,k3-r5f-rproc.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/ti,k3-r5f-rproc.yaml
>>>>>> index d905d614502b..130fbaacc4b1 100644
>>>>>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/ti,k3-r5f-rproc.yaml
>>>>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/ti,k3-r5f-rproc.yaml
>>>>>> @@ -14,8 +14,12 @@ description: |
>>>>>>    processor subsystems/clusters (R5FSS). The dual core cluster can be used
>>>>>>    either in a LockStep mode providing safety/fault tolerance features or in a
>>>>>>    Split mode providing two individual compute cores for doubling the compute
>>>>>> -  capacity. These are used together with other processors present on the SoC
>>>>>> -  to achieve various system level goals.
>>>>>> +  capacity on most SoCs. These are used together with other processors present
>>>>>> +  on the SoC to achieve various system level goals.
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +  AM64x SoCs do not support LockStep mode, but rather a new non-safety mode
>>>>>> +  called "Single-CPU" mode, where only Core0 is used, but with ability to use
>>>>>> +  Core1's TCMs as well.
>>>>>>  
>>>>>>    Each Dual-Core R5F sub-system is represented as a single DTS node
>>>>>>    representing the cluster, with a pair of child DT nodes representing
>>>>>> @@ -33,6 +37,7 @@ properties:
>>>>>>        - ti,am654-r5fss
>>>>>>        - ti,j721e-r5fss
>>>>>>        - ti,j7200-r5fss
>>>>>> +      - ti,am64-r5fss
>>>>>>  
>>>>>>    power-domains:
>>>>>>      description: |
>>>>>> @@ -56,11 +61,12 @@ properties:
>>>>>>  
>>>>>>    ti,cluster-mode:
>>>>>>      $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/uint32
>>>>>> -    enum: [0, 1]
>>>>>>      description: |
>>>>>>        Configuration Mode for the Dual R5F cores within the R5F cluster.
>>>>>> -      Should be either a value of 1 (LockStep mode) or 0 (Split mode),
>>>>>> -      default is LockStep mode if omitted.
>>>>>> +      Should be either a value of 1 (LockStep mode) or 0 (Split mode) on
>>>>>> +      most SoCs (AM65x, J721E, J7200), default is LockStep mode if omitted;
>>>>>> +      and should be either a value of 0 (Split mode) or 2 (Single-CPU mode)
>>>>>> +      on AM64x SoCs, default is Split mode if omitted.
>>>>>>  
>>>>>>  # R5F Processor Child Nodes:
>>>>>>  # ==========================
>>>>>> @@ -97,6 +103,7 @@ patternProperties:
>>>>>>            - ti,am654-r5f
>>>>>>            - ti,j721e-r5f
>>>>>>            - ti,j7200-r5f
>>>>>> +          - ti,am64-r5f
>>>>>>  
>>>>>>        reg:
>>>>>>          items:
>>>>>> @@ -198,6 +205,20 @@ patternProperties:
>>>>>>  
>>>>>>      unevaluatedProperties: false
>>>>>>  
>>>>>> +if:
>>>>>> +  properties:
>>>>>> +    compatible:
>>>>>> +      enum:
>>>>>> +        - ti,am64-r5fss
>>>>>> +then:
>>>>>> +  properties:
>>>>>> +    ti,cluster-mode:
>>>>>> +      enum: [0, 2]
>>>>>> +else:
>>>>>> +  properties:
>>>>>> +    ti,cluster-mode:
>>>>>> +      enum: [0, 1]
>>>>>> +
>>>>>>  required:
>>>>>>    - compatible
>>>>>>    - power-domains
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] dt-bindings: remoteproc: k3-r5f: Update bindings for AM64x SoCs
@ 2021-05-28 12:06               ` Suman Anna
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: Suman Anna @ 2021-05-28 12:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Bjorn Andersson
  Cc: Mathieu Poirier, Rob Herring, Lokesh Vutla, linux-remoteproc,
	devicetree, linux-arm-kernel, linux-kernel

On 5/27/21 10:17 PM, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
> On Mon 24 May 10:47 CDT 2021, Suman Anna wrote:
> 
>> On 5/21/21 3:40 PM, Mathieu Poirier wrote:
>>> Hi suman,
>>>
>>> On Wed, May 12, 2021 at 09:47:44PM -0500, Suman Anna wrote:
>>>> Hi Rob,
>>>>
>>>> On 4/19/21 8:55 AM, Suman Anna wrote:
>>>>> Hi Rob,
>>>>>
>>>>> On 3/27/21 9:31 AM, Suman Anna wrote:
>>>>>> The K3 AM64x SoCs have two dual-core Arm R5F clusters/subsystems, with
>>>>>> 2 R5F cores each, both in the MAIN voltage domain.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> These clusters are a revised IP version compared to those present on
>>>>>> J721E and J7200 SoCs, and supports a new "Single-CPU" mode instead of
>>>>>> LockStep mode. Update the K3 R5F remoteproc bindings with the compatible
>>>>>> info relevant to these R5F clusters/subsystems on K3 AM64x SoCs.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Suman Anna <s-anna@ti.com>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>> v2: No changes
>>>>>>
>>>>>>  .../bindings/remoteproc/ti,k3-r5f-rproc.yaml  | 31 ++++++++++++++++---
>>>>>
>>>>> Looks like this patch has fallen through the cracks, can you please review and
>>>>> give your ack for this patch so that Bjorn can pick up the series for 5.13?
>>>>
>>>> Gentle reminder, do you have any comments on this patch. Appreciate your ack so
>>>> that we can get this in for 5.14?
>>>
>>> If memory serves me well Rob indicated that he would not review or comment on
>>> bindings related to multi-core remote processors.  On the flip side he also
>>> mentioned that he would not object to their presence.  And since this is an
>>> increment to an existing binding rather than a new one, I think it is fair for
>>> us to pick it up.  
>>>
>>> Rob - please intervene if my recollections are not accurate and accept my honest
>>> apologies.  Otherwise: 
>>>
>>> Reviewed-by: Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@linaro.org> 
>>>
>>
>> Thank you Mathieu.
>>
>> Bjorn,
>> Is it possible for you to give an immutable branch with just this bindings so we
>> can add the R5F nodes as well and avoid any checkpatch warnings on Nishanth's
>> tree with our K3 dts patches?
>>
> 
> Hi Suman,
> 
> That sounds rather ambitious, but you can now find this at:
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/andersson/remoteproc.git/tag/?h=20210327143117.1840-2-s-anna@ti.com

Thanks a lot Bjorn. Appreciate this a lot.

regards
Suman

> 
> Regards,
> Bjorn
> 
>> regards
>> Suman
>>
>>>>
>>>> regards
>>>> Suman
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> regards
>>>>> Suman
>>>>>
>>>>>>  1 file changed, 26 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/ti,k3-r5f-rproc.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/ti,k3-r5f-rproc.yaml
>>>>>> index d905d614502b..130fbaacc4b1 100644
>>>>>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/ti,k3-r5f-rproc.yaml
>>>>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/ti,k3-r5f-rproc.yaml
>>>>>> @@ -14,8 +14,12 @@ description: |
>>>>>>    processor subsystems/clusters (R5FSS). The dual core cluster can be used
>>>>>>    either in a LockStep mode providing safety/fault tolerance features or in a
>>>>>>    Split mode providing two individual compute cores for doubling the compute
>>>>>> -  capacity. These are used together with other processors present on the SoC
>>>>>> -  to achieve various system level goals.
>>>>>> +  capacity on most SoCs. These are used together with other processors present
>>>>>> +  on the SoC to achieve various system level goals.
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +  AM64x SoCs do not support LockStep mode, but rather a new non-safety mode
>>>>>> +  called "Single-CPU" mode, where only Core0 is used, but with ability to use
>>>>>> +  Core1's TCMs as well.
>>>>>>  
>>>>>>    Each Dual-Core R5F sub-system is represented as a single DTS node
>>>>>>    representing the cluster, with a pair of child DT nodes representing
>>>>>> @@ -33,6 +37,7 @@ properties:
>>>>>>        - ti,am654-r5fss
>>>>>>        - ti,j721e-r5fss
>>>>>>        - ti,j7200-r5fss
>>>>>> +      - ti,am64-r5fss
>>>>>>  
>>>>>>    power-domains:
>>>>>>      description: |
>>>>>> @@ -56,11 +61,12 @@ properties:
>>>>>>  
>>>>>>    ti,cluster-mode:
>>>>>>      $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/uint32
>>>>>> -    enum: [0, 1]
>>>>>>      description: |
>>>>>>        Configuration Mode for the Dual R5F cores within the R5F cluster.
>>>>>> -      Should be either a value of 1 (LockStep mode) or 0 (Split mode),
>>>>>> -      default is LockStep mode if omitted.
>>>>>> +      Should be either a value of 1 (LockStep mode) or 0 (Split mode) on
>>>>>> +      most SoCs (AM65x, J721E, J7200), default is LockStep mode if omitted;
>>>>>> +      and should be either a value of 0 (Split mode) or 2 (Single-CPU mode)
>>>>>> +      on AM64x SoCs, default is Split mode if omitted.
>>>>>>  
>>>>>>  # R5F Processor Child Nodes:
>>>>>>  # ==========================
>>>>>> @@ -97,6 +103,7 @@ patternProperties:
>>>>>>            - ti,am654-r5f
>>>>>>            - ti,j721e-r5f
>>>>>>            - ti,j7200-r5f
>>>>>> +          - ti,am64-r5f
>>>>>>  
>>>>>>        reg:
>>>>>>          items:
>>>>>> @@ -198,6 +205,20 @@ patternProperties:
>>>>>>  
>>>>>>      unevaluatedProperties: false
>>>>>>  
>>>>>> +if:
>>>>>> +  properties:
>>>>>> +    compatible:
>>>>>> +      enum:
>>>>>> +        - ti,am64-r5fss
>>>>>> +then:
>>>>>> +  properties:
>>>>>> +    ti,cluster-mode:
>>>>>> +      enum: [0, 2]
>>>>>> +else:
>>>>>> +  properties:
>>>>>> +    ti,cluster-mode:
>>>>>> +      enum: [0, 1]
>>>>>> +
>>>>>>  required:
>>>>>>    - compatible
>>>>>>    - power-domains
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>


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

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] TI K3 R5F remoteproc support on AM64x SoCs
  2021-03-27 14:31 ` Suman Anna
                   ` (2 preceding siblings ...)
  (?)
@ 2021-05-31 14:50 ` patchwork-bot+linux-remoteproc
  -1 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: patchwork-bot+linux-remoteproc @ 2021-05-31 14:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Suman Anna; +Cc: linux-remoteproc

Hello:

This series was applied to andersson/remoteproc.git (refs/heads/for-next):

On Sat, 27 Mar 2021 09:31:15 -0500 you wrote:
> Hi All,
> 
> The following series is a minor revision of the K3 R5F remoteproc AM64x
> support series [1] addressing one review comment from Mathieu. Please
> see the v1 cover-letter for details about the revised R5F IP in TI AM64x
> SoCs.
> 
> [...]

Here is the summary with links:
  - [v2,1/2] dt-bindings: remoteproc: k3-r5f: Update bindings for AM64x SoCs
    https://git.kernel.org/andersson/remoteproc/c/fee613a6fec6
  - [v2,2/2] remoteproc: k3-r5: Extend support to R5F clusters on AM64x SoCs
    https://git.kernel.org/andersson/remoteproc/c/ee99ee7c929c

You are awesome, thank you!
--
Deet-doot-dot, I am a bot.
https://korg.docs.kernel.org/patchwork/pwbot.html



^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2021-05-31 15:01 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 21+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2021-03-27 14:31 [PATCH v2 0/2] TI K3 R5F remoteproc support on AM64x SoCs Suman Anna
2021-03-27 14:31 ` Suman Anna
2021-03-27 14:31 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] dt-bindings: remoteproc: k3-r5f: Update bindings for " Suman Anna
2021-03-27 14:31   ` Suman Anna
2021-04-19 13:55   ` Suman Anna
2021-04-19 13:55     ` Suman Anna
2021-05-13  2:47     ` Suman Anna
2021-05-13  2:47       ` Suman Anna
2021-05-21 20:40       ` Mathieu Poirier
2021-05-21 20:40         ` Mathieu Poirier
2021-05-24 15:47         ` Suman Anna
2021-05-24 15:47           ` Suman Anna
2021-05-28  3:17           ` Bjorn Andersson
2021-05-28  3:17             ` Bjorn Andersson
2021-05-28 12:06             ` Suman Anna
2021-05-28 12:06               ` Suman Anna
2021-03-27 14:31 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] remoteproc: k3-r5: Extend support to R5F clusters on " Suman Anna
2021-03-27 14:31   ` Suman Anna
2021-03-29 15:44   ` Mathieu Poirier
2021-03-29 15:44     ` Mathieu Poirier
2021-05-31 14:50 ` [PATCH v2 0/2] TI K3 R5F remoteproc support " patchwork-bot+linux-remoteproc

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.