From: Arnaud POULIQUEN <arnaud.pouliquen@foss.st.com>
To: Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@linaro.org>
Cc: Ohad Ben-Cohen <ohad@wizery.com>,
Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@linaro.org>,
<linux-remoteproc@vger.kernel.org>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
<linux-stm32@st-md-mailman.stormreply.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] remoteproc: stm32: fix mbox_send_message call
Date: Fri, 28 May 2021 10:03:39 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <b563f831-3876-1d5d-7268-ce1260363906@foss.st.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YLBi/JZ0u8394tI8@builder.lan>
Hello Bjorn,
On 5/28/21 5:26 AM, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
> On Tue 20 Apr 04:19 CDT 2021, Arnaud Pouliquen wrote:
>
>> mbox_send_message is called by passing a local dummy message or
>> a function parameter. As the message is queued, it is dereferenced.
>> This works because the message field is not used by the stm32 ipcc
>> driver, but it is not clean.
>>
>> Fix by passing a constant string in all cases.
>>
>> The associated comments are removed because rproc should not have to
>> deal with the behavior of the mailbox frame.
>>
>
> Didn't we conclude that the mailbox driver doesn't actually dereference
> the pointer being passed?
Right it can store the reference to queue the sent.
>
> If so I would prefer that you just pass NULL, so that if you in the
> future need to pass some actual data it will be easy to distinguish the
> old and new case.
I can not use NULL pointer in stm32_rproc_attach and stm32_rproc_detach case.
The reason is that the tx_done callback is not called if the message is NULL.
(https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/latest/source/drivers/mailbox/mailbox.c#L106)
I could use NULL pointer in stm32_rproc_kick, but I would prefer to use the same way
of calling mbox_send_message for all use cases and not take into account the
mailbox internal behavior.
Thanks,
Arnaud
>
> Regards,
> Bjorn
>
>> Reported-by: Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@linaro.org>
>> Signed-off-by: Arnaud Pouliquen <arnaud.pouliquen@foss.st.com>
>> ---
>> drivers/remoteproc/stm32_rproc.c | 14 +++++---------
>> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/stm32_rproc.c b/drivers/remoteproc/stm32_rproc.c
>> index 7353f9e7e7af..0e8203a432ab 100644
>> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/stm32_rproc.c
>> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/stm32_rproc.c
>> @@ -474,14 +474,12 @@ static int stm32_rproc_attach(struct rproc *rproc)
>> static int stm32_rproc_detach(struct rproc *rproc)
>> {
>> struct stm32_rproc *ddata = rproc->priv;
>> - int err, dummy_data, idx;
>> + int err, idx;
>>
>> /* Inform the remote processor of the detach */
>> idx = stm32_rproc_mbox_idx(rproc, STM32_MBX_DETACH);
>> if (idx >= 0 && ddata->mb[idx].chan) {
>> - /* A dummy data is sent to allow to block on transmit */
>> - err = mbox_send_message(ddata->mb[idx].chan,
>> - &dummy_data);
>> + err = mbox_send_message(ddata->mb[idx].chan, "stop");
>> if (err < 0)
>> dev_warn(&rproc->dev, "warning: remote FW detach without ack\n");
>> }
>> @@ -493,15 +491,13 @@ static int stm32_rproc_detach(struct rproc *rproc)
>> static int stm32_rproc_stop(struct rproc *rproc)
>> {
>> struct stm32_rproc *ddata = rproc->priv;
>> - int err, dummy_data, idx;
>> + int err, idx;
>>
>> /* request shutdown of the remote processor */
>> if (rproc->state != RPROC_OFFLINE) {
>> idx = stm32_rproc_mbox_idx(rproc, STM32_MBX_SHUTDOWN);
>> if (idx >= 0 && ddata->mb[idx].chan) {
>> - /* a dummy data is sent to allow to block on transmit */
>> - err = mbox_send_message(ddata->mb[idx].chan,
>> - &dummy_data);
>> + err = mbox_send_message(ddata->mb[idx].chan, "detach");
>> if (err < 0)
>> dev_warn(&rproc->dev, "warning: remote FW shutdown without ack\n");
>> }
>> @@ -556,7 +552,7 @@ static void stm32_rproc_kick(struct rproc *rproc, int vqid)
>> continue;
>> if (!ddata->mb[i].chan)
>> return;
>> - err = mbox_send_message(ddata->mb[i].chan, (void *)(long)vqid);
>> + err = mbox_send_message(ddata->mb[i].chan, "kick");
>> if (err < 0)
>> dev_err(&rproc->dev, "%s: failed (%s, err:%d)\n",
>> __func__, ddata->mb[i].name, err);
>> --
>> 2.17.1
>>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-05-28 8:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-04-20 9:19 [PATCH] remoteproc: stm32: fix mbox_send_message call Arnaud Pouliquen
2021-05-28 3:26 ` Bjorn Andersson
2021-05-28 8:03 ` Arnaud POULIQUEN [this message]
2021-06-22 7:56 ` Arnaud POULIQUEN
2021-06-23 18:45 ` Bjorn Andersson
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=b563f831-3876-1d5d-7268-ce1260363906@foss.st.com \
--to=arnaud.pouliquen@foss.st.com \
--cc=bjorn.andersson@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-remoteproc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-stm32@st-md-mailman.stormreply.com \
--cc=mathieu.poirier@linaro.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).