From: Suman Anna <s-anna@ti.com>
To: Loic PALLARDY <loic.pallardy@st.com>,
Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@linaro.org>
Cc: "ohad@wizery.com" <ohad@wizery.com>,
"linux-remoteproc@vger.kernel.org"
<linux-remoteproc@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Arnaud POULIQUEN <arnaud.pouliquen@st.com>,
"benjamin.gaignard@linaro.org" <benjamin.gaignard@linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 05/16] remoteproc: modify rproc_handle_carveout to support preallocated region
Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2018 14:12:44 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <0f1aa281-e1cf-6496-202f-b69ec50c5df6@ti.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <717bc0509ad54c4e8a9f601b8220edc2@SFHDAG7NODE2.st.com>
On 10/23/18 2:09 PM, Loic PALLARDY wrote:
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Suman Anna <s-anna@ti.com>
>> Sent: mardi 23 octobre 2018 19:40
>> To: Loic PALLARDY <loic.pallardy@st.com>; Bjorn Andersson
>> <bjorn.andersson@linaro.org>
>> Cc: ohad@wizery.com; linux-remoteproc@vger.kernel.org; linux-
>> kernel@vger.kernel.org; Arnaud POULIQUEN <arnaud.pouliquen@st.com>;
>> benjamin.gaignard@linaro.org
>> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 05/16] remoteproc: modify rproc_handle_carveout to
>> support preallocated region
>>
>>>>
>>>> On Thu 30 Nov 08:46 PST 2017, Loic Pallardy wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> In current version rproc_handle_carveout function support only dynamic
>>>>> region allocation.
>>>>> This patch extends rproc_handle_carveout function to support different
>>>> carveout
>>>>> configurations:
>>>>> - fixed DA and fixed PA: check if already part of pre-registered carveouts
>>>>> (platform driver). If no, return error.
>>>>> - fixed DA and any PA: check if already part of pre-allocated carveouts
>>>>> (platform driver). If not found and rproc supports iommu, continue with
>>>>> dynamic allocation (DA will be used for iommu programming), else
>> return
>>>>> error as no way to force DA.
>>>>> - any DA and any PA: use original dynamic allocation
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Loic Pallardy <loic.pallardy@st.com>
>>>>> ---
>>>>> drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c | 40
>>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>> 1 file changed, 40 insertions(+)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
>>>> b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
>>>>> index 78525d1..515a17a 100644
>>>>> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
>>>>> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
>>>>> @@ -184,6 +184,10 @@ void *rproc_da_to_va(struct rproc *rproc, u64
>> da,
>>>> int len)
>>>>> struct rproc_mem_entry *carveout;
>>>>> void *ptr = NULL;
>>>>>
>>>>> + /*
>>>>> + * da_to_va platform driver is deprecated. Driver should register
>>>>> + * carveout thanks to rproc_add_carveout function
>>>>> + */
>>>>
>>>> I think this comment is unrelated to the rest of this patch. I also
>>>> think that at the end of the carveout-rework we should have a patch
>>>> removing this ops.
>>>
>>> I'll remove this comment and add a da_to_va clean-up patch at the end of
>> the series
>>
>> da_to_va platform ops is actually used to provide the remoteproc
>> internal memory translations for the most part, not restricted just to
>> fixed carveouts. Also, typically these do have multiple address-views -
>> one the regular bus-address view, and another a remote processor address
>> view.
>
> da_to_va op sis still there. I was proposing to remove this ops as we were discussing to register all carveouts accessed by coprocessor in rproc core carveout list.
> This will allow to centralize all carveout definitions and to see all memory resources viewed by coprocessor (va, pa and da) via debugfs...
Yes, understood. I was commenting only on the future removal part, and
if it is really judicious to do that.
regards
Suman
>
> Regards,
> Loic
>>
>> regards
>> Suman
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>> if (rproc->ops->da_to_va) {
>>>>> ptr = rproc->ops->da_to_va(rproc, da, len);
>>>>> if (ptr)
>>>>> @@ -677,6 +681,7 @@ static int rproc_handle_carveout(struct rproc
>>>> *rproc,
>>>>> struct rproc_mem_entry *carveout, *mapping;
>>>>> struct device *dev = &rproc->dev;
>>>>> dma_addr_t dma;
>>>>> + phys_addr_t pa;
>>>>> void *va;
>>>>> int ret;
>>>>>
>>>>> @@ -698,6 +703,41 @@ static int rproc_handle_carveout(struct rproc
>>>> *rproc,
>>>>> if (!carveout)
>>>>> return -ENOMEM;
>>>>>
>>>>> + /* Check carveout rsc already part of a registered carveout */
>>>>> + if (rsc->da != FW_RSC_ADDR_ANY) {
>>>>
>>>> As mentioned before, I consider it perfectly viable for rsc->da to be
>>>> ANY and the driver providing a fixed carveout.
>>>
>>> Yes I'll change sequence to lookup by name first and then verify exact
>> parameters matching , not only da definition.
>>>
>>>>
>>>>> + va = rproc_find_carveout_by_da(rproc, rsc->da, rsc->len);
>>>>> +
>>>>> + if (va) {
>>>>
>>>> In a system with an iommu it's possible that rsc->len is larger than
>>>> some carveout->len and va is NULL here so we fall through, allocate some
>>>> memory and remap a segment of the carveout. (Or hopefully fails
>>>> attempting).
>>>>
>>>>> + /* Registered region found */
>>>>> + pa = rproc_va_to_pa(va);
>>>>> + if (rsc->pa != FW_RSC_ADDR_ANY && rsc->pa !=
>>>> (u32)pa) {
>>>>> + /* Carveout doesn't match request */
>>>>> + dev_err(dev->parent,
>>>>> + "Failed to find carveout fitting da and
>>>> pa\n");
>>>>> + return -ENOMEM;
>>>>> + }
>>>>> +
>>>>> + /* Update rsc table with physical address */
>>>>> + rsc->pa = (u32)pa;
>>>>> +
>>>>> + /* Update carveouts list */
>>>>> + carveout->va = va;
>>>>> + carveout->len = rsc->len;
>>>>> + carveout->da = rsc->da;
>>>>> + carveout->priv = (void *)CARVEOUT_RSC;
>>>>> +
>>>>> + list_add_tail(&carveout->node, &rproc->carveouts);
>>>>
>>>> rproc_find_carveout_by_da() will return a reference into a carveout, now
>>>> we add another overlapping carveout into the same list.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I think it would be saner to not allow the resource table to describe
>>>> subsets of carveouts registered by the driver.
>>>>
>>>> In which case this would better find a carveout by name or exact da,
>>>> then check that the pa, da, len and rsc->flags are adequate.
>>>
>>> Agree
>>> /Loic
>>>>
>>>>> +
>>>>> + return 0;
>>>>> + }
>>>>> +
>>>>> + if (!rproc->domain) {
>>>>
>>>> Currently this function ignore invalid values of da when !domain, so I
>>>> think it would be good you can submit this sanity check in it's own
>>>> patch so that anyone bisecting this would know why their broken
>> firmware
>>>> suddenly isn't loadable.
>>>>
>>>>> + dev_err(dev->parent,
>>>>> + "Bad carveout rsc configuration\n");
>>>>> + return -ENOMEM;
>>>>> + }
>>>>> + }
>>>>> +
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Bjorn
>>> --
>>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-remoteproc"
>> in
>>> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
>>> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>>>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-10-23 19:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 48+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-11-30 16:46 [PATCH v2 00/16] remoteproc: add fixed memory region support Loic Pallardy
2017-11-30 16:46 ` [PATCH v2 01/16] remoteproc: add rproc_va_to_pa function Loic Pallardy
2017-12-14 0:30 ` Bjorn Andersson
2018-01-12 7:43 ` Loic PALLARDY
2017-11-30 16:46 ` [PATCH v2 02/16] remoteproc: add release ops in rproc_mem_entry struct Loic Pallardy
2017-12-14 0:34 ` Bjorn Andersson
2018-01-12 7:43 ` Loic PALLARDY
2017-11-30 16:46 ` [PATCH v2 03/16] remoteproc: introduce rproc_add_carveout function Loic Pallardy
2017-12-14 0:36 ` Bjorn Andersson
2018-01-12 7:45 ` Loic PALLARDY
2017-11-30 16:46 ` [PATCH v2 04/16] remoteproc: introduce rproc_find_carveout_by_da Loic Pallardy
2017-12-14 0:45 ` Bjorn Andersson
2018-01-12 7:48 ` Loic PALLARDY
2017-11-30 16:46 ` [PATCH v2 05/16] remoteproc: modify rproc_handle_carveout to support preallocated region Loic Pallardy
2017-12-14 0:59 ` Bjorn Andersson
2018-01-12 7:56 ` Loic PALLARDY
2018-10-23 17:40 ` Suman Anna
2018-10-23 19:09 ` Loic PALLARDY
2018-10-23 19:12 ` Suman Anna [this message]
2017-11-30 16:46 ` [PATCH v2 06/16] remoteproc: modify vring allocation " Loic Pallardy
2017-12-14 1:09 ` Bjorn Andersson
2018-01-12 8:13 ` Loic PALLARDY
2017-11-30 16:46 ` [PATCH v2 07/16] remoteproc: st: add reserved memory support Loic Pallardy
2017-12-14 1:15 ` Bjorn Andersson
2018-01-12 8:19 ` Loic PALLARDY
2017-11-30 16:46 ` [PATCH v2 08/16] remoteproc: add name in rproc_mem_entry struct Loic Pallardy
2017-12-14 1:21 ` Bjorn Andersson
2018-01-12 8:19 ` Loic PALLARDY
2017-11-30 16:46 ` [PATCH v2 09/16] remoteproc: add memory device management support Loic Pallardy
2017-11-30 16:46 ` [PATCH v2 10/16] remoteproc: add memory device registering in rproc_add_carveout Loic Pallardy
2017-12-14 1:29 ` Bjorn Andersson
2018-01-15 9:09 ` Loic PALLARDY
2017-11-30 16:46 ` [PATCH v2 11/16] remoteproc: introduce rproc_find_carveout_by_name function Loic Pallardy
2017-12-14 1:32 ` Bjorn Andersson
2018-01-15 9:10 ` Loic PALLARDY
2017-11-30 16:46 ` [PATCH v2 12/16] remoteproc: look-up memory-device for vring allocation Loic Pallardy
2017-12-14 1:44 ` Bjorn Andersson
2018-01-15 20:44 ` Loic PALLARDY
2017-11-30 16:46 ` [PATCH v2 13/16] remoteproc: look-up memory-device for virtio device allocation Loic Pallardy
2017-12-14 5:32 ` Bjorn Andersson
2018-01-15 20:57 ` Loic PALLARDY
2017-11-30 16:46 ` [PATCH v2 14/16] remoteproc: look-up pre-registered carveout by name for carveout allocation Loic Pallardy
2017-12-14 5:34 ` Bjorn Andersson
2018-01-15 20:59 ` Loic PALLARDY
2017-11-30 16:46 ` [PATCH v2 15/16] remoteproc: st: associate memory device to memory regions Loic Pallardy
2017-12-14 5:37 ` Bjorn Andersson
2018-01-15 21:04 ` Loic PALLARDY
2017-11-30 16:46 ` [PATCH v2 16/16] rpmsg: virtio: allocate buffer from parent Loic Pallardy
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=0f1aa281-e1cf-6496-202f-b69ec50c5df6@ti.com \
--to=s-anna@ti.com \
--cc=arnaud.pouliquen@st.com \
--cc=benjamin.gaignard@linaro.org \
--cc=bjorn.andersson@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-remoteproc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=loic.pallardy@st.com \
--cc=ohad@wizery.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is 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).