Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 19 Sep 2022 19:27:52 +0530 | Subject | Re: [PATCH v6 4/8] remoteproc: qcom: Update rproc parse firmware callback | From | Srinivasa Rao Mandadapu <> |
| |
On 9/12/2022 4:25 AM, Stephen Boyd wrote: Thanks for your time Stephen!!! > Quoting Srinivasa Rao Mandadapu (2022-09-08 06:23:38) >> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/qcom_q6v5_adsp.c b/drivers/remoteproc/qcom_q6v5_adsp.c >> index 02d17b4..207270d4 100644 >> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/qcom_q6v5_adsp.c >> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/qcom_q6v5_adsp.c >> @@ -447,7 +447,7 @@ static unsigned long adsp_panic(struct rproc *rproc) >> return qcom_q6v5_panic(&adsp->q6v5); >> } >> >> -static const struct rproc_ops adsp_ops = { >> +static struct rproc_ops adsp_ops = { > This is sad. > >> .start = adsp_start, >> .stop = adsp_stop, >> .da_to_va = adsp_da_to_va, >> @@ -590,6 +590,9 @@ static int adsp_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) >> return ret; >> } >> >> + if (desc->has_iommu) >> + adsp_ops.parse_fw = rproc_elf_load_rsc_table; >> + > Why not have two different set of ops so that the function pointer table > can't be hijacked? One for the parse_fw callback? Or simply return from > rproc_elf_load_rsc_table() when has_iommu is false? Okay. Will change accordingly. > >> rproc = rproc_alloc(&pdev->dev, pdev->name, &adsp_ops,
| |