Messages in this thread | | | From | Vincent Guittot <> | Date | Fri, 7 Oct 2022 17:58:59 +0200 | Subject | Re: [PATCH v3 0/9] Introduce a unified API for SCMI Server testing |
| |
On Fri, 7 Oct 2022 at 17:37, Cristian Marussi <cristian.marussi@arm.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 07, 2022 at 04:23:33PM +0200, Vincent Guittot wrote: > > Hi Cristian, > > > > Hi Vincent > > thanks for give it a try ! > > > On Sat, 3 Sept 2022 at 20:31, Cristian Marussi <cristian.marussi@arm.com> wrote: > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > This series aims to introduce a new SCMI unified userspace interface meant > > > to ease testing an SCMI Server implementation for compliance, fuzzing etc., > > > from the perspective of the OSPM agent (non-secure world only ...) > > > > > > It is proposed as a testing/development facility, it is NOT meant to be a > > > feature to use in production, but only enabled in Kconfig for test > > > deployments. > > > > > > Currently an SCMI Compliance Suite like the one at [1] can only work by > > > injecting SCMI messages at the SCMI transport layer using the mailbox test > > > driver (CONFIG_MAILBOX_TEST) via its few debugfs entries and looking at > > > the related replies from the SCMI backend Server. > > > > > > > ... > > > > > > > > In V2 the runtime enable/disable switching capability has been removed > > > (for now) since still not deemed to be stable/reliable enough: as a > > > consequence when SCMI Raw support is compiled in, the regular SCMI stack > > > drivers are now inhibited permanently for that Kernel. > > > > > > A quick and trivial example from the shell...reading from a sensor > > > injecting a properly crafted packet in raw mode: > > > > > > # INJECT THE SENSOR_READING MESSAGE FOR SENSOR ID=1 (binary little endian) > > > root@deb-buster-arm64:~# echo -e -n \\x06\\x54\\x00\\x00\\x01\\x00\\x00\\x00\\x00\\x00\\x00\\x00 > /sys/kernel/debug/scmi_raw/message > > > > I have tried your patchset with an SCMI server using an optee-os > > transport channel but I have a timed out error when trying your > > example above to read sensor1 > > > > # echo -e -n \\x06\\x54\\x00\\x00\\x01\\x00\\x00\\x00\\x00\\x00\\x00\\x00 > > > /sys/kernel/debug/scmi_raw/message > > # [ 93.306690] arm-scmi firmware:scmi0: timed out in RAW response - > > HDR:00005406 > > > > and there no response available when trying to read it with > > # cat /sys/kernel/debug/scmi_raw/message > > > > is there anything cat'ting /sys/kernel/debug/scmi_raw/errors ?
It was empty
> > > > > The sensor 1 can be successfully read in normal mode: > > # cat /sys/class/hwmon/hwmon0/temp1_input > > 25000 > > # > > > > In both case, the SCMI server received the requests and replied successfully > > > > Could it be that you process the answer differently in case of raw mode ? > > > > Well, absolutely, when in raw mode the reply is picked up directly into > the RX path and copied in a message queue to be read from asyncrhnously > later via debugfs. > > ... mmm I think I found the problem...the reply is picked up on the RX *IRQ* > path as of now...but in optee/SMC there is no interrupt (sometime there is in > SMC) and the reply is instead read back straight away (transport is marked as > sync_cmds_completed_on_ret=true in fact).... so this is the issue probably ... > I have NOT tested on anything but mailbox and virtio till now...and I > missed this possibility that this NO-irq reply was a thing even when NOT > in polling mode (which I do not support)...my bad :< > > Ok, next week I'll rework the series to fix this big_BUG and some other minor > things...in the meantime if you want to try this snippet down below... > > ... this won't definitely be the final patch but it could let you experiment > more (only build tested though )
Thanks. The patch below fixes my problem with optee transport layer
> > Thanks for testing ! > Cristian > > --->8------- > > diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/raw_mode.c b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/raw_mode.c > index 13eeebe4b7a8..b9fcb66a1b6a 100644 > --- a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/raw_mode.c > +++ b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/raw_mode.c > @@ -197,6 +197,8 @@ struct scmi_dbg_raw_data { > size_t rx_size; > }; > > +void scmi_raw_message_report(void *r, struct scmi_xfer *xfer, unsigned int idx); > + > static inline > struct scmi_raw_buffer *scmi_raw_buffer_get(struct scmi_raw_mode_info *raw, > unsigned int idx) > @@ -389,22 +391,34 @@ static void scmi_xfer_raw_worker(struct work_struct *work) > > xfer = rw->xfer; > > - /* > - * Waiters are queued by wait-deadline at the end, so some of > - * them could have been already expired when processed, BUT we > - * have to check the completion status anyway just in case a > - * virtually expired (aged) transaction was indeed completed > - * fine and we'll have to wait for the asynchronous part (if > - * any). > - */ > - aging = jiffies - rw->start_jiffies; > - tmo = max_tmo > aging ? max_tmo - aging : 0; > - > - if ((tmo && !wait_for_completion_timeout(&xfer->done, tmo)) || > - (!tmo && !try_wait_for_completion(&xfer->done))) { > - dev_err(dev, "timed out in RAW response - HDR:%08X\n", > - pack_scmi_header(&xfer->hdr)); > - ret = -ETIMEDOUT; > + if (!raw->desc->sync_cmds_completed_on_ret) { > + /* > + * Waiters are queued by wait-deadline at the end, so some of > + * them could have been already expired when processed, BUT we > + * have to check the completion status anyway just in case a > + * virtually expired (aged) transaction was indeed completed > + * fine and we'll have to wait for the asynchronous part (if > + * any). > + */ > + aging = jiffies - rw->start_jiffies; > + tmo = max_tmo > aging ? max_tmo - aging : 0; > + > + if ((tmo && > + !wait_for_completion_timeout(&xfer->done, tmo)) || > + (!tmo && !try_wait_for_completion(&xfer->done))) { > + dev_err(dev, > + "timed out in RAW response - HDR:%08X\n", > + pack_scmi_header(&xfer->hdr)); > + ret = -ETIMEDOUT; > + } > + } else { > + raw->desc->ops->fetch_response(rw->cinfo, xfer); > + /* Trace polled replies. */ > + trace_scmi_msg_dump(xfer->hdr.protocol_id, xfer->hdr.id, > + "RESP", > + xfer->hdr.seq, xfer->hdr.status, > + xfer->rx.buf, xfer->rx.len); > + scmi_raw_message_report(raw, xfer, SCMI_RAW_REPLY_QUEUE); > } > > /* Avoid unneeded async waits */ > > > ---8<------- >
| |