Messages in this thread Patch in this message | | | Date | Tue, 31 Oct 2023 18:06:46 +0100 | From | Neil Armstrong <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] remoteproc: qcom: pas: make region assign more generic |
| |
Hi,
On 30/10/2023 14:10, Mukesh Ojha wrote: > > > On 10/30/2023 3:33 PM, Neil Armstrong wrote: >> The current memory region assign only supports a single >> memory region. >> >> But new platforms introduces more regions to make the >> memory requirements more flexible for various use cases. >> Those new platforms also shares the memory region between the >> DSP and HLOS. >> >> To handle this, make the region assign more generic in order >> to support more than a single memory region and also permit >> setting the regions permissions as shared. >> >> Signed-off-by: Neil Armstrong <neil.armstrong@linaro.org> >> --- >> drivers/remoteproc/qcom_q6v5_pas.c | 102 ++++++++++++++++++++++++------------- >> 1 file changed, 66 insertions(+), 36 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/qcom_q6v5_pas.c b/drivers/remoteproc/qcom_q6v5_pas.c >> index 913a5d2068e8..4829fd26e17d 100644 >> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/qcom_q6v5_pas.c >> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/qcom_q6v5_pas.c >> @@ -33,6 +33,8 @@ >> #define ADSP_DECRYPT_SHUTDOWN_DELAY_MS 100 >> +#define MAX_ASSIGN_COUNT 2 >> + >> struct adsp_data { >> int crash_reason_smem; >> const char *firmware_name; >> @@ -51,6 +53,9 @@ struct adsp_data { >> int ssctl_id; >> int region_assign_idx; >> + int region_assign_count; >> + bool region_assign_shared; >> + int region_assign_vmid; >> }; >> struct qcom_adsp { >> @@ -87,15 +92,18 @@ struct qcom_adsp { >> phys_addr_t dtb_mem_phys; >> phys_addr_t mem_reloc; >> phys_addr_t dtb_mem_reloc; >> - phys_addr_t region_assign_phys; >> + phys_addr_t region_assign_phys[MAX_ASSIGN_COUNT]; >> void *mem_region; >> void *dtb_mem_region; >> size_t mem_size; >> size_t dtb_mem_size; >> - size_t region_assign_size; >> + size_t region_assign_size[MAX_ASSIGN_COUNT]; >> int region_assign_idx; >> - u64 region_assign_perms; >> + int region_assign_count; >> + bool region_assign_shared; >> + int region_assign_vmid; >> + u64 region_assign_perms[MAX_ASSIGN_COUNT]; >> struct qcom_rproc_glink glink_subdev; >> struct qcom_rproc_subdev smd_subdev; >> @@ -590,37 +598,52 @@ static int adsp_alloc_memory_region(struct qcom_adsp *adsp) >> static int adsp_assign_memory_region(struct qcom_adsp *adsp) >> { >> - struct reserved_mem *rmem = NULL; >> - struct qcom_scm_vmperm perm; >> + struct qcom_scm_vmperm perm[MAX_ASSIGN_COUNT]; >> + unsigned int perm_size = 1; > > AFAICS, not need of initialization.
Indeed, removed
> >> struct device_node *node; >> - int ret; >> + int offset, ret; > > Nit: one variable per line.
Done
> >> if (!adsp->region_assign_idx) > > Not related to this patch.. > Should not this be valid only for > 1 ?
I don't understand, only region_assign_idx > 1 triggers a memory_assign, and this check discards configurations with region_assign_idx == 0 as expected.
> > >> return 0; >> - node = of_parse_phandle(adsp->dev->of_node, "memory-region", adsp->region_assign_idx); >> - if (node) >> - rmem = of_reserved_mem_lookup(node); >> - of_node_put(node); >> - if (!rmem) { >> - dev_err(adsp->dev, "unable to resolve shareable memory-region\n"); >> - return -EINVAL; >> - } >> + for (offset = 0; offset < adsp->region_assign_count; ++offset) { >> + struct reserved_mem *rmem = NULL; >> + >> + node = of_parse_phandle(adsp->dev->of_node, "memory-region", >> + adsp->region_assign_idx + offset); >> + if (node) >> + rmem = of_reserved_mem_lookup(node); >> + of_node_put(node); >> + if (!rmem) { >> + dev_err(adsp->dev, "unable to resolve shareable memory-region index %d\n", >> + offset); >> + return -EINVAL; > + } > > >> - perm.vmid = QCOM_SCM_VMID_MSS_MSA; >> - perm.perm = QCOM_SCM_PERM_RW; >> + if (adsp->region_assign_shared) { >> + perm[0].vmid = QCOM_SCM_VMID_HLOS; >> + perm[0].perm = QCOM_SCM_PERM_RW; >> + perm[1].vmid = adsp->region_assign_vmid; >> + perm[1].perm = QCOM_SCM_PERM_RW; >> + perm_size = 2; >> + } else { >> + perm[0].vmid = adsp->region_assign_vmid; >> + perm[0].perm = QCOM_SCM_PERM_RW; >> + perm_size = 1; >> + } >> - adsp->region_assign_phys = rmem->base; >> - adsp->region_assign_size = rmem->size; >> - adsp->region_assign_perms = BIT(QCOM_SCM_VMID_HLOS); >> + adsp->region_assign_phys[offset] = rmem->base; >> + adsp->region_assign_size[offset] = rmem->size; >> + adsp->region_assign_perms[offset] = BIT(QCOM_SCM_VMID_HLOS); > > Do we need array for this, is this changing ?
We need to keep region_assign_perms for unassign, but for the other 2 we would need to duplicate the code from adsp_assign_memory_region into adsp_unassign_memory_region.
> >> - ret = qcom_scm_assign_mem(adsp->region_assign_phys, >> - adsp->region_assign_size, >> - &adsp->region_assign_perms, >> - &perm, 1); >> - if (ret < 0) { >> - dev_err(adsp->dev, "assign memory failed\n"); >> - return ret; >> + ret = qcom_scm_assign_mem(adsp->region_assign_phys[offset], >> + adsp->region_assign_size[offset], >> + &adsp->region_assign_perms[offset], >> + perm, perm_size); >> + if (ret < 0) { >> + dev_err(adsp->dev, "assign memory %d failed\n", offset); >> + return ret; >> + } >> } >> return 0; >> @@ -629,20 +652,22 @@ static int adsp_assign_memory_region(struct qcom_adsp *adsp) >> static void adsp_unassign_memory_region(struct qcom_adsp *adsp) >> { >> struct qcom_scm_vmperm perm; >> - int ret; >> + int offset, ret; >> - if (!adsp->region_assign_idx) >> + if (!adsp->region_assign_idx || adsp->region_assign_shared) >> return; >> - perm.vmid = QCOM_SCM_VMID_HLOS; >> - perm.perm = QCOM_SCM_PERM_RW; >> + for (offset = 0; offset < adsp->region_assign_count; ++offset) { >> + perm.vmid = QCOM_SCM_VMID_HLOS; >> + perm.perm = QCOM_SCM_PERM_RW; > >> - ret = qcom_scm_assign_mem(adsp->region_assign_phys, >> - adsp->region_assign_size, >> - &adsp->region_assign_perms, >> - &perm, 1); >> - if (ret < 0) >> - dev_err(adsp->dev, "unassign memory failed\n"); >> + ret = qcom_scm_assign_mem(adsp->region_assign_phys[offset], >> + adsp->region_assign_size[offset], >> + &adsp->region_assign_perms[offset], >> + &perm, 1); >> + if (ret < 0) >> + dev_err(adsp->dev, "unassign memory failed\n"); >> + } >> } >> static int adsp_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) >> @@ -696,6 +721,9 @@ static int adsp_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) >> adsp->info_name = desc->sysmon_name; >> adsp->decrypt_shutdown = desc->decrypt_shutdown; >> adsp->region_assign_idx = desc->region_assign_idx; >> + adsp->region_assign_count = min_t(int, MAX_ASSIGN_COUNT, desc->region_assign_count); >> + adsp->region_assign_vmid = desc->region_assign_vmid; >> + adsp->region_assign_shared = desc->region_assign_shared; >> if (dtb_fw_name) { >> adsp->dtb_firmware_name = dtb_fw_name; >> adsp->dtb_pas_id = desc->dtb_pas_id; >> @@ -1163,6 +1191,8 @@ static const struct adsp_data sm8550_mpss_resource = { >> .sysmon_name = "modem", >> .ssctl_id = 0x12, >> .region_assign_idx = 2, >> + .region_assign_count = 1, >> + .region_assign_vmid = QCOM_SCM_VMID_MSS_MSA, >> }; >> static const struct of_device_id adsp_of_match[] = { >> > > -Mukesh
Thanks, Neil
| |