From: Shengjiu Wang <shengjiu.wang@gmail.com>
To: Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@linaro.org>
Cc: Shengjiu Wang <shengjiu.wang@nxp.com>,
Ohad Ben Cohen <ohad@wizery.com>,
Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@linaro.org>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>, Shawn Guo <shawnguo@kernel.org>,
Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@pengutronix.de>,
Sascha Hauer <kernel@pengutronix.de>,
Fabio Estevam <festevam@gmail.com>,
Daniel Baluta <daniel.baluta@nxp.com>,
NXP Linux Team <linux-imx@nxp.com>,
"open list:REMOTE PROCESSOR (REMOTEPROC) SUBSYSTEM"
<linux-remoteproc@vger.kernel.org>,
"open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS"
<devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
"moderated list:ARM/FREESCALE IMX / MXC ARM ARCHITECTURE"
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 3/4] remoteproc: imx_dsp_rproc: Add remoteproc driver for DSP on i.MX
Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2021 09:35:54 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAA+D8ANwXZdXheMkV8VHJ90JT8o+9YXFuE-EjTejijGUa4YALw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210917152236.GA1878943@p14s>
Hi Mathieu
On Fri, Sep 17, 2021 at 11:22 PM Mathieu Poirier
<mathieu.poirier@linaro.org> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Sep 17, 2021 at 05:44:44PM +0800, Shengjiu Wang wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 17, 2021 at 1:20 PM Shengjiu Wang <shengjiu.wang@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fri, Sep 17, 2021 at 1:00 AM Mathieu Poirier
> > > <mathieu.poirier@linaro.org> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > [...]
> > > >
> > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > +/**
> > > > > > > + * imx_dsp_rproc_elf_load_segments() - load firmware segments to memory
> > > > > > > + * @rproc: remote processor which will be booted using these fw segments
> > > > > > > + * @fw: the ELF firmware image
> > > > > > > + *
> > > > > > > + * This function specially checks if memsz is zero or not, otherwise it
> > > > > > > + * is mostly same as rproc_elf_load_segments().
> > > > > > > + */
> > > > > > > +static int imx_dsp_rproc_elf_load_segments(struct rproc *rproc,
> > > > > > > + const struct firmware *fw)
> > > > > > > +{
> > > > > > > + struct device *dev = &rproc->dev;
> > > > > > > + u8 class = fw_elf_get_class(fw);
> > > > > > > + u32 elf_phdr_get_size = elf_size_of_phdr(class);
> > > > > > > + const u8 *elf_data = fw->data;
> > > > > > > + const void *ehdr, *phdr;
> > > > > > > + int i, ret = 0;
> > > > > > > + u16 phnum;
> > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > + ehdr = elf_data;
> > > > > > > + phnum = elf_hdr_get_e_phnum(class, ehdr);
> > > > > > > + phdr = elf_data + elf_hdr_get_e_phoff(class, ehdr);
> > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > + /* go through the available ELF segments */
> > > > > > > + for (i = 0; i < phnum; i++, phdr += elf_phdr_get_size) {
> > > > > > > + u64 da = elf_phdr_get_p_paddr(class, phdr);
> > > > > > > + u64 memsz = elf_phdr_get_p_memsz(class, phdr);
> > > > > > > + u64 filesz = elf_phdr_get_p_filesz(class, phdr);
> > > > > > > + u64 offset = elf_phdr_get_p_offset(class, phdr);
> > > > > > > + u32 type = elf_phdr_get_p_type(class, phdr);
> > > > > > > + void *ptr;
> > > > > > > + bool is_iomem;
> > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > + if (type != PT_LOAD || !memsz)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > You did a really good job with adding comments but this part is undocumented...
> > > > > > If I read this correctly you need to check for !memsz because some part of
> > > > > > the program segment may have a header but its memsz is zero, in which case it can
> > > > > > be safely skipped. So why is that segment in the image to start with, and why
> > > > > > is it marked PT_LOAD if it is not needed? This is very puzzling...
> > > > >
> > > > > Actually I have added comments in the header of this function.
> > > >
> > > > Indeed there is a mention of memsz in the function's header but it doesn't
> > > > mention _why_ this is needed, and that is what I'm looking for.
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > memsz= 0 with PT_LOAD issue, I have asked the toolchain's vendor,
> > > > > they said that this case is allowed by elf spec...
> > > > >
> > > > > And in the "pru_rproc.c" and "mtk_scp.c", seems they met same problem
> > > > > they also check the filesz in their internal xxx_elf_load_segments() function.
> > > >
> > > > In both cases they are skipping PT_LOAD sections where "filesz" is '0', which
> > > > makes sense because we don't know how many bytes to copy. But here you are
> > > > skipping over a PT_LOAD section with a potentially valid filesz, and that is the
> > > > part I don't understand.
> > >
> > > Ok, I can use filesz instead. For my case, filesz = memsz = 0,
> > > it is the same result I want.
>
> If that is the case then rproc_elf_load_segments() should work, i.e it won't
> copy anything. If rproc_elf_load_segments() doesn't work for you then there are
> corner cases you haven't told me about.
>
> > >
> > > The reason why I use "memsz '' is because there is "if (filesz > memsz) "
> > > check after this, if memsz is zero, then "filesz" should be zero too, other
> > > values are not allowed.
> >
> > But I still think checking "!memsz" is better than filesz, because
> > memsz > filesz is allowed (filesz = 0), the code below can be executed.
> > filesz > memsz is not allowed.
> >
> > What do you think?
>
> I don't see a need to add a custom implementation for things that _may_ happen.
> If using the default rproc_elf_load_segments() works than go with that. We can deal
> with problems if/when there is a need for it.
>
The default rproc_elf_load_segments() with filesz = memsz = 0, then the
rproc_da_to_va() return ptr=NULL, then rproc_elf_load_segments() will return
with error. So this is the reason to add a custom implementation.
best regards
wang shengjiu
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-09-22 1:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-09-08 9:10 [PATCH v4 0/4] Add remoteproc driver for DSP on i.MX Shengjiu Wang
2021-09-08 9:10 ` [PATCH v4 1/4] remoteproc: imx_rproc: Move common structure to header file Shengjiu Wang
2021-09-14 17:46 ` Mathieu Poirier
2021-09-08 9:10 ` [PATCH v4 2/4] remoteproc: imx_rproc: Add IMX_RPROC_SCU_API method Shengjiu Wang
2021-09-14 17:47 ` Mathieu Poirier
2021-09-08 9:10 ` [PATCH v4 3/4] remoteproc: imx_dsp_rproc: Add remoteproc driver for DSP on i.MX Shengjiu Wang
2021-09-14 17:56 ` Mathieu Poirier
2021-09-15 3:09 ` Shengjiu Wang
2021-09-15 16:16 ` Mathieu Poirier
2021-09-16 10:44 ` Shengjiu Wang
2021-09-16 16:59 ` Mathieu Poirier
2021-09-17 5:20 ` Shengjiu Wang
2021-09-17 9:44 ` Shengjiu Wang
2021-09-17 15:22 ` Mathieu Poirier
2021-09-22 1:35 ` Shengjiu Wang [this message]
2021-09-22 17:55 ` Mathieu Poirier
2021-09-23 1:48 ` Shengjiu Wang
2021-09-16 17:23 ` Mathieu Poirier
2021-09-17 6:04 ` Shengjiu Wang
2021-09-08 9:10 ` [PATCH v4 4/4] dt-bindings: dsp: fsl: update binding document for remote proc driver Shengjiu Wang
2021-09-10 12:51 ` Daniel Baluta
2021-09-10 21:43 ` Rob Herring
2021-09-13 2:49 ` Shengjiu Wang
2021-09-13 17:08 ` Mathieu Poirier
2021-09-14 11:45 ` Daniel Baluta
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=CAA+D8ANwXZdXheMkV8VHJ90JT8o+9YXFuE-EjTejijGUa4YALw@mail.gmail.com \
--to=shengjiu.wang@gmail.com \
--cc=bjorn.andersson@linaro.org \
--cc=daniel.baluta@nxp.com \
--cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=festevam@gmail.com \
--cc=kernel@pengutronix.de \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-imx@nxp.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-remoteproc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mathieu.poirier@linaro.org \
--cc=ohad@wizery.com \
--cc=robh+dt@kernel.org \
--cc=s.hauer@pengutronix.de \
--cc=shawnguo@kernel.org \
--cc=shengjiu.wang@nxp.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).