Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 21 Jul 2023 12:03:17 +0530 | Subject | Re: [V3,09/11] remoteproc: qcom: Add Hexagon based multipd rproc driver | From | Manikanta Mylavarapu <> |
| |
On 7/20/2023 6:43 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 18/07/2023 14:04, Manikanta Mylavarapu wrote: >> It adds support to bring up remoteproc's on multipd model. >> Pd means protection domain. It's similar to process in Linux. >> Here QDSP6 processor runs each wifi radio functionality on a >> separate process. One process can't access other process >> resources, so this is termed as PD i.e protection domain. > > ... > >> + * User pd boot-info format mentioned below >> + * <Version> <No of elements passing over smem> <Header type> <Header Length> >> + * <Process Id> <Load address> <firmware mem Size> >> + * >> + * Returns 0 on success else negative value on failure. >> + */ >> +static int share_upd_bootinfo_to_q6(struct rproc *rproc) >> +{ >> + int ret; >> + size_t size; >> + u16 cnt = 0, version; >> + void *ptr; >> + struct q6_wcss *wcss = rproc->priv, *upd_wcss; >> + struct device_node *upd_np; >> + struct platform_device *upd_pdev; >> + struct rproc *upd_rproc; >> + struct userpd_boot_info upd_bootinfo = {0}; >> + const struct firmware *fw; >> + >> + ret = qcom_smem_alloc(REMOTE_PID, UPD_BOOT_INFO_SMEM_ID, >> + UPD_BOOT_INFO_SMEM_SIZE); >> + if (ret && ret != -EEXIST) { >> + dev_err(wcss->dev, >> + "failed to allocate q6 bootinfo smem segment\n"); >> + return ret; >> + } >> + >> + ptr = qcom_smem_get(REMOTE_PID, UPD_BOOT_INFO_SMEM_ID, &size); >> + if (IS_ERR(ptr) || size != UPD_BOOT_INFO_SMEM_SIZE) { >> + dev_err(wcss->dev, >> + "Unable to acquire smp2p item(%d) ret:%ld\n", >> + UPD_BOOT_INFO_SMEM_ID, PTR_ERR(ptr)); >> + return PTR_ERR(ptr); >> + } >> + >> + /* print physical address */ >> + dev_info(wcss->dev, >> + "smem phyiscal address:0x%lX\n", >> + (uintptr_t)qcom_smem_virt_to_phys(ptr)); > > One more thought. Why do you need it? Even if this is not a kernel or > user-space address, why would like to disclose the memory layout? I > think this is contradictory to the kptr_restrict concept. >
Sure, I will remove.
Thanks & Regards, Manikanta.
>> + >> + /*Version*/ > > > > Best regards, > Krzysztof >
| |