From: Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@linaro.org>
To: Arnaud POULIQUEN <arnaud.pouliquen@st.com>
Cc: "ohad@wizery.com" <ohad@wizery.com>,
"bjorn.andersson@linaro.org" <bjorn.andersson@linaro.org>,
"linux-remoteproc@vger.kernel.org"
<linux-remoteproc@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 08/14] remoteproc: Introduce function rproc_detach()
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2020 16:40:42 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20201119234042.GC4137289@xps15> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <807cebaa-2d64-401a-d673-8f40b919924e@st.com>
On Mon, Nov 09, 2020 at 10:05:35AM +0100, Arnaud POULIQUEN wrote:
> Hi Mathieu,
>
> On 10/30/20 8:57 PM, Mathieu Poirier wrote:
> > Introduce function rproc_detach() to enable the remoteproc
> > core to release the resources associated with a remote processor
> > without stopping its operation.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@linaro.org>
> > Reviewed-by: Peng Fan <peng.fan@nxp.com>
> > ---
> > drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c | 65 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> > include/linux/remoteproc.h | 1 +
> > 2 files changed, 65 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> > index 62e88ff65009..6b33a83960d2 100644
> > --- a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> > +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> > @@ -1667,7 +1667,7 @@ static int rproc_stop(struct rproc *rproc, bool crashed)
> > /*
> > * __rproc_detach(): Does the opposite of rproc_attach()
> > */
> > -static int __maybe_unused __rproc_detach(struct rproc *rproc)
> > +static int __rproc_detach(struct rproc *rproc)
> > {
> > struct device *dev = &rproc->dev;
> > int ret;
> > @@ -1910,6 +1910,69 @@ void rproc_shutdown(struct rproc *rproc)
> > }
> > EXPORT_SYMBOL(rproc_shutdown);
> >
> > +/**
> > + * rproc_detach() - Detach the remote processor from the
> > + * remoteproc core
> > + *
> > + * @rproc: the remote processor
> > + *
> > + * Detach a remote processor (previously attached to with rproc_actuate()).
> > + *
> > + * In case @rproc is still being used by an additional user(s), then
> > + * this function will just decrement the power refcount and exit,
> > + * without disconnecting the device.
> > + *
> > + * Function rproc_detach() calls __rproc_detach() in order to let a remote
> > + * processor know that services provided by the application processor are
> > + * no longer available. From there it should be possible to remove the
> > + * platform driver and even power cycle the application processor (if the HW
> > + * supports it) without needing to switch off the remote processor.
> > + */
> > +int rproc_detach(struct rproc *rproc)
> > +{
> > + struct device *dev = &rproc->dev;
> > + int ret;
> > +
> > + ret = mutex_lock_interruptible(&rproc->lock);
> > + if (ret) {
> > + dev_err(dev, "can't lock rproc %s: %d\n", rproc->name, ret);
> > + return ret;
> > + }
> > +
> > + if (rproc->state != RPROC_RUNNING && rproc->state != RPROC_ATTACHED) {
> > + ret = -EPERM;
> > + goto out;
> > + }
> > +
> > + /* if the remote proc is still needed, bail out */
> > + if (!atomic_dec_and_test(&rproc->power)) {
> > + ret = -EBUSY;
> > + goto out;
> > + }
> > +
> > + ret = __rproc_detach(rproc);
> > + if (ret) {
> > + atomic_inc(&rproc->power);
> > + goto out;
> > + }
> > +
> > + /* clean up all acquired resources */
> > + rproc_resource_cleanup(rproc);
> > +
> > + rproc_disable_iommu(rproc);
>
> I'm not an IOMMU expert,so maybe this remark is not relevant...
> As IOMMU manage the access of the remote device to its memory,
> could this lead to a remote device crash?
Right - that is the kind of thing that tormented me when I wrote this set. On
some system it might cause a crash but on others it is needed. As such I
decided to include it in the detach() process and let people implement the
functionality should they need to. We can remove it but it is guaranteed that
someone will post a patch to add it again.
Based on the scenario it may have to be something like rproc_detach_iommu().
Since we have no clue on what the requirements will be I decided to simply keep
the current call. Let me know if you really disagree with my approach.
>
> Regards,
> Arnaud
>
> > +
> > + /*
> > + * Set the remote processor's table pointer to NULL. Since mapping
> > + * of the resource table to a virtual address is done in the platform
> > + * driver, unmapping should also be done there.
> > + */
> > + rproc->table_ptr = NULL;
> > +out:
> > + mutex_unlock(&rproc->lock);
> > + return ret;
> > +}
> > +EXPORT_SYMBOL(rproc_detach);
> > +
> > /**
> > * rproc_get_by_phandle() - find a remote processor by phandle
> > * @phandle: phandle to the rproc
> > diff --git a/include/linux/remoteproc.h b/include/linux/remoteproc.h
> > index 3faff9bb4fb8..6713faab6959 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/remoteproc.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/remoteproc.h
> > @@ -656,6 +656,7 @@ rproc_of_resm_mem_entry_init(struct device *dev, u32 of_resm_idx, size_t len,
> >
> > int rproc_boot(struct rproc *rproc);
> > void rproc_shutdown(struct rproc *rproc);
> > +int rproc_detach(struct rproc *rproc);
> > void rproc_report_crash(struct rproc *rproc, enum rproc_crash_type type);
> > int rproc_coredump_add_segment(struct rproc *rproc, dma_addr_t da, size_t size);
> > int rproc_coredump_add_custom_segment(struct rproc *rproc,
> >
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-11-19 23:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 39+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-10-30 19:56 [PATCH v2 00/14] remoteproc: Add support for detaching from rproc Mathieu Poirier
2020-10-30 19:57 ` [PATCH v2 01/14] remoteproc: Re-check state in rproc_shutdown() Mathieu Poirier
2020-11-09 9:40 ` Arnaud POULIQUEN
2020-10-30 19:57 ` [PATCH v2 02/14] remoteproc: Remove useless check in rproc_del() Mathieu Poirier
2020-11-09 9:40 ` Arnaud POULIQUEN
2020-10-30 19:57 ` [PATCH v2 03/14] remoteproc: Add new RPROC_ATTACHED state Mathieu Poirier
2020-11-09 9:41 ` Arnaud POULIQUEN
2020-10-30 19:57 ` [PATCH v2 04/14] remoteproc: Properly represent the attached state Mathieu Poirier
2020-11-09 9:41 ` Arnaud POULIQUEN
2020-10-30 19:57 ` [PATCH v2 05/14] remoteproc: Properly deal with a kernel panic when attached Mathieu Poirier
2020-11-09 9:41 ` Arnaud POULIQUEN
2020-10-30 19:57 ` [PATCH v2 06/14] remoteproc: Add new detach() remoteproc operation Mathieu Poirier
2020-11-06 17:31 ` Arnaud POULIQUEN
2020-11-19 23:06 ` Mathieu Poirier
2020-10-30 19:57 ` [PATCH v2 07/14] remoteproc: Introduce function __rproc_detach() Mathieu Poirier
2020-11-06 17:43 ` Arnaud POULIQUEN
2020-11-19 23:27 ` Mathieu Poirier
2020-10-30 19:57 ` [PATCH v2 08/14] remoteproc: Introduce function rproc_detach() Mathieu Poirier
2020-11-09 9:05 ` Arnaud POULIQUEN
2020-11-19 23:40 ` Mathieu Poirier [this message]
2020-10-30 19:57 ` [PATCH v2 09/14] remoteproc: Rename function rproc_actuate() Mathieu Poirier
2020-11-09 9:41 ` Arnaud POULIQUEN
2020-10-30 19:57 ` [PATCH v2 10/14] remoteproc: Add return value to function rproc_shutdown() Mathieu Poirier
2020-11-09 9:14 ` Arnaud POULIQUEN
2020-11-19 23:46 ` Mathieu Poirier
2020-10-30 19:57 ` [PATCH v2 11/14] remoteproc: Properly deal with a stop request when attached Mathieu Poirier
2020-11-09 9:42 ` Arnaud POULIQUEN
2020-11-12 17:36 ` Arnaud POULIQUEN
2020-10-30 19:57 ` [PATCH v2 12/14] remoteproc: Properly deal with detach request Mathieu Poirier
2020-10-30 19:57 ` [RFC v2 13/14] remoteproc: Add automation flags Mathieu Poirier
2020-11-06 14:38 ` Arnaud POULIQUEN
2020-11-06 17:20 ` Mathieu Poirier
2020-11-12 13:56 ` Arnaud POULIQUEN
2020-11-13 21:27 ` Mathieu Poirier
2020-11-16 10:21 ` Arnaud POULIQUEN
2020-11-20 20:40 ` Mathieu Poirier
2020-10-30 19:57 ` [RFC v2 14/14] remoteproc: Refactor rproc delete and cdev release path Mathieu Poirier
2020-11-12 18:20 ` [PATCH v2 00/14] remoteproc: Add support for detaching from rproc Arnaud POULIQUEN
2020-11-12 18:41 ` Mathieu Poirier
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20201119234042.GC4137289@xps15 \
--to=mathieu.poirier@linaro.org \
--cc=arnaud.pouliquen@st.com \
--cc=bjorn.andersson@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-remoteproc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ohad@wizery.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).