Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH] remoteproc: Add support for predefined notifyids | From | Arnaud POULIQUEN <> | Date | Wed, 15 Jan 2020 16:09:29 +0100 |
| |
On 1/15/20 3:28 PM, Clément Leger wrote: > Hi Arnaud, > > ----- On 15 Jan, 2020, at 15:06, Arnaud Pouliquen arnaud.pouliquen@st.com wrote: > >> Hi Clément, >> >> On 1/15/20 11:21 AM, Clement Leger wrote: >>> In order to support preallocated notify ids, if their value is >>> equal to FW_RSC_NOTIFY_ID_ANY, then do no allocate a notify id >>> dynamically but try to allocate the requested one. This is useful when >>> using custom ids to bind them to custom vendor resources. For instance, >>> it allow to assign a group of queues to a specific interrupti in order >>> to dispatch notifications. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Clement Leger <cleger@kalray.eu> >>> --- >>> drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c | 27 +++++++++++++++++++-------- >>> include/linux/remoteproc.h | 1 + >>> 2 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c >>> b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c >>> index 307df98347ba..b1485fcd0f11 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c >>> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c >>> @@ -351,14 +351,27 @@ int rproc_alloc_vring(struct rproc_vdev *rvdev, int i) >>> /* >>> * Assign an rproc-wide unique index for this vring >>> * TODO: assign a notifyid for rvdev updates as well >>> - * TODO: support predefined notifyids (via resource table) >>> */ >>> - ret = idr_alloc(&rproc->notifyids, rvring, 0, 0, GFP_KERNEL); >>> - if (ret < 0) { >>> - dev_err(dev, "idr_alloc failed: %d\n", ret); >>> - return ret; >>> + if (rsc->vring[i].notifyid == FW_RSC_NOTIFY_ID_ANY) { >>> + ret = idr_alloc(&rproc->notifyids, rvring, 0, 0, GFP_KERNEL); >>> + if (ret < 0) { >>> + dev_err(dev, "idr_alloc failed: %d\n", ret); >>> + return ret; >>> + } >>> + notifyid = ret; >>> + >>> + /* Let the rproc know the notifyid of this vring.*/ >>> + rsc->vring[i].notifyid = notifyid; >>> + } else { >>> + /* Reserve requested notify_id */ >>> + notifyid = rsc->vring[i].notifyid; >>> + ret = idr_alloc(&rproc->notifyids, rvring, notifyid, >>> + notifyid + 1, GFP_KERNEL); >>> + if (ret < 0) { >>> + dev_err(dev, "idr_alloc failed: %d\n", ret); >>> + return ret; >>> + } >>> } >>> - notifyid = ret; >>> >>> /* Potentially bump max_notifyid */ >>> if (notifyid > rproc->max_notifyid) >>> @@ -366,8 +379,6 @@ int rproc_alloc_vring(struct rproc_vdev *rvdev, int i) >>> >>> rvring->notifyid = notifyid; >>> >>> - /* Let the rproc know the notifyid of this vring.*/ >>> - rsc->vring[i].notifyid = notifyid; >>> return 0; >>> } >> The rproc_free_vring function resets the notifyid to -1 on free. >> This could generate a side effect if the resource table is not reloaded. > > Oh indeed, I did not thought of that. What would you recommend ? > If using -1 in free vring, notify ids will be reallocated at next > round. Regarding the code i'm not sure that it is useful to reset the notifyID to -1 on free. In current version, on alloc, the notifyID is overwriten without check. And as vdev status is updated, vring struct in resource table should be considered as invalid Except if i missed a usecase/race condition...
> > I was also worried that it would break some existing user applications > which uses "0" as a notify id in vring but expect the id to be > allocated dynamically. With my modification, it means it will try to > use "0" as a predefined id, leading to allocation failure. > Yes this could introduce regression for firmware that sets 0 as default value. Probably better to introduce this patch with a new version of the resource table :)
Regards Arnaud >> >>> >>> diff --git a/include/linux/remoteproc.h b/include/linux/remoteproc.h >>> index 16ad66683ad0..dcae3394243e 100644 >>> --- a/include/linux/remoteproc.h >>> +++ b/include/linux/remoteproc.h >>> @@ -123,6 +123,7 @@ enum fw_resource_type { >>> }; >>> >>> #define FW_RSC_ADDR_ANY (-1) >>> +#define FW_RSC_NOTIFY_ID_ANY (-1)This define can also be used in >>> rproc_free_vring > > Indeed. > > Thanks for your review. > > Regards, > > Clément > >> >> Regards, >> Arnaud >>> >>> /** >>> * struct fw_rsc_carveout - physically contiguous memory request
| |