Re: [PATCH V5 3/6] remoteproc: imx_rproc: support attaching to i.MX8QXP M4

From: Mathieu Poirier
Date: Thu Sep 29 2022 - 19:24:41 EST

Next message: Laurent Pinchart: "Re: [PATCH] drm: do not call detect for connectors which are forced on"
Previous message: Dmitry Torokhov: "Re: [PATCH v6 06/13] ACPI: resources: Add wake_capable parameter to acpi_dev_irq_flags"
In reply to: Peng Fan: "Re: [PATCH V5 3/6] remoteproc: imx_rproc: support attaching to i.MX8QXP M4"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On Thu, 29 Sept 2022 at 17:17, Peng Fan <peng.fan@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 9/29/2022 10:58 PM, Mathieu Poirier wrote:
> > On Wed, 28 Sept 2022 at 21:52, Peng Fan <peng.fan@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Subject: Re: [PATCH V5 3/6] remoteproc: imx_rproc: support attaching to
> >>> i.MX8QXP M4
> >>>
> >>> On Wed, Sep 28, 2022 at 06:01:45PM +0800, Peng Fan wrote:
> >>>> Hi Mathieu,
> >>>>
> >>>> On 9/28/2022 3:39 PM, Peng Fan wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On 9/28/2022 1:56 AM, Mathieu Poirier wrote:
> >>>>>> On Tue, Sep 27, 2022 at 02:48:02AM +0000, Peng Fan wrote:
> >>>>>>> Hi Mathieu,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Thanks for reviewing this patchset.
> >>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [PATCH V5 3/6] remoteproc: imx_rproc: support
> >>>>>>>> attaching to i.MX8QXP M4
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On Wed, Aug 24, 2022 at 09:10:20AM +0800, Peng Fan (OSS) wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> From: Peng Fan <peng.fan@xxxxxxx>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> When M4 is kicked by SCFW, M4 runs in its own hardware
> >>>>>>>>> partition, Linux could only do IPC with M4, it could not
> >>>>>>>>> start, stop, update image.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> We disable recovery reboot when M4 is managed by SCFW,
> >>>>>>>>> because remoteproc core still not support M4 auto-recovery
> >>>>>>>>> without loading image.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Peng Fan <peng.fan@xxxxxxx>
> >>>>>>>>> ---
> >>>>>>>>> drivers/remoteproc/imx_rproc.c | 108
> >>>>>>>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> >>>>>>>>> 1 file changed, 107 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/imx_rproc.c
> >>>>>>>>> b/drivers/remoteproc/imx_rproc.c index
> >>>>>>>>> 7cc4fd207e2d..bcba74e90020
> >>>>>>>>> 100644
> >>>>>>>>> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/imx_rproc.c
> >>>>>>>>> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/imx_rproc.c
> >>>>>>>>> @@ -6,6 +6,7 @@
> >>>>>>>>> #include <linux/arm-smccc.h>
> >>>>>>>>> #include <linux/clk.h>
> >>>>>>>>> #include <linux/err.h>
> >>>>>>>>> +#include <linux/firmware/imx/sci.h>
> >>>>>>>>> #include <linux/interrupt.h>
> >>>>>>>>> #include <linux/kernel.h>
> >>>>>>>>> #include <linux/mailbox_client.h> @@ -59,6 +60,8 @@
> >>>>>>>>> #define IMX_SIP_RPROC_STARTED 0x01
> >>>>>>>>> #define IMX_SIP_RPROC_STOP 0x02
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> +#define IMX_SC_IRQ_GROUP_REBOOTED 5
> >>>>>>>>> +
> >>>>>>>>> /**
> >>>>>>>>> * struct imx_rproc_mem - slim internal memory structure
> >>>>>>>>> * @cpu_addr: MPU virtual address of the memory region @@
> >>>>>>>>> -89,6
> >>>>>>>>> +92,10 @@ struct imx_rproc {
> >>>>>>>>> struct work_struct rproc_work;
> >>>>>>>>> struct workqueue_struct *workqueue;
> >>>>>>>>> void __iomem *rsc_table;
> >>>>>>>>> + struct imx_sc_ipc *ipc_handle;
> >>>>>>>>> + struct notifier_block rproc_nb;
> >>>>>>>>> + u32 rproc_pt; /* partition id */
> >>>>>>>>> + u32 rsrc_id; /* resource id */
> >>>>>>>>> };
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> static const struct imx_rproc_att imx_rproc_att_imx93[] =
> >>>>>>>>> { @@ -117,6
> >>>>>>>>> +124,18 @@ static const struct imx_rproc_att
> >>>>>>>>> +imx_rproc_att_imx93[] = {
> >>>>>>>>> { 0xD0000000, 0xa0000000, 0x10000000, 0 }, };
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> +static const struct imx_rproc_att imx_rproc_att_imx8qxp[] =
> >>>>>>>>> +{
> >>>>>>>>> + { 0x08000000, 0x08000000, 0x10000000, 0 },
> >>>>>>>>> + /* TCML/U */
> >>>>>>>>> + { 0x1FFE0000, 0x34FE0000, 0x00040000, ATT_OWN |
> >>>>>>>>> +ATT_IOMEM },
> >>>>>>>>> + /* OCRAM(Low 96KB) */
> >>>>>>>>> + { 0x21000000, 0x00100000, 0x00018000, 0 },
> >>>>>>>>> + /* OCRAM */
> >>>>>>>>> + { 0x21100000, 0x00100000, 0x00040000, 0 },
> >>>>>>>>> + /* DDR (Data) */
> >>>>>>>>> + { 0x80000000, 0x80000000, 0x60000000, 0 }, };
> >>>>>>>>> +
> >>>>>>>>> static const struct imx_rproc_att imx_rproc_att_imx8mn[] =
> >>>>>>>>> {
> >>>>>>>>> /* dev addr , sys addr , size , flags */
> >>>>>>>>> /* ITCM */
> >>>>>>>>> @@ -255,6 +274,12 @@ static const struct imx_rproc_dcfg
> >>>>>>>> imx_rproc_cfg_imx8mq = {
> >>>>>>>>> .method = IMX_RPROC_MMIO,
> >>>>>>>>> };
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> +static const struct imx_rproc_dcfg imx_rproc_cfg_imx8qxp =
> >>>>>>>>> +{
> >>>>>>>>> + .att = imx_rproc_att_imx8qxp,
> >>>>>>>>> + .att_size = ARRAY_SIZE(imx_rproc_att_imx8qxp),
> >>>>>>>>> + .method = IMX_RPROC_SCU_API, };
> >>>>>>>>> +
> >>>>>>>>> static const struct imx_rproc_dcfg imx_rproc_cfg_imx8ulp =
> >>>>>>>>> {
> >>>>>>>>> .att = imx_rproc_att_imx8ulp,
> >>>>>>>>> .att_size = ARRAY_SIZE(imx_rproc_att_imx8ulp),
> >>>>>>>>> @@ -680,6 +705,37 @@ static void imx_rproc_free_mbox(struct
> >>>>>>>>> rproc
> >>>>>>>> *rproc)
> >>>>>>>>> mbox_free_channel(priv->rx_ch);
> >>>>>>>>> }
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> +static void imx_rproc_put_scu(struct rproc *rproc) {
> >>>>>>>>> + struct imx_rproc *priv = rproc->priv;
> >>>>>>>>> + const struct imx_rproc_dcfg *dcfg = priv->dcfg;
> >>>>>>>>> +
> >>>>>>>>> + if (dcfg->method != IMX_RPROC_SCU_API)
> >>>>>>>>> + return;
> >>>>>>>>> +
> >>>>>>>>> + if (!imx_sc_rm_is_resource_owned(priv->ipc_handle,
> >>>>>>>>> priv->rsrc_id))
> >>>>>>>>> + return;
> >>>>>>>>> +
> >>>>>>>>> + imx_scu_irq_group_enable(IMX_SC_IRQ_GROUP_REBOOTED,
> >>>>>>>> BIT(priv->rproc_pt), false);
> >>>>>>>>> + imx_scu_irq_unregister_notifier(&priv->rproc_nb);
> >>>>>>>>> +}
> >>>>>>>>> +
> >>>>>>>>> +static int imx_rproc_partition_notify(struct notifier_block
> >>>>>>>>> +*nb,
> >>>>>>>>> + unsigned long event, void *group) {
> >>>>>>>>> + struct imx_rproc *priv = container_of(nb, struct
> >>>>>>>>> +imx_rproc, rproc_nb);
> >>>>>>>>> +
> >>>>>>>>> + /* Ignore other irqs */
> >>>>>>>>> + if (!((event & BIT(priv->rproc_pt)) && (*(u8 *)group ==
> >>>>>>>> IMX_SC_IRQ_GROUP_REBOOTED)))
> >>>>>>>>> + return 0;
> >>>>>>>>> +
> >>>>>>>>> + rproc_report_crash(priv->rproc, RPROC_WATCHDOG);
> >>>>>>>>> +
> >>>>>>>>> + pr_info("Partition%d reset!\n", priv->rproc_pt);
> >>>>>>>>> +
> >>>>>>>>> + return 0;
> >>>>>>>>> +}
> >>>>>>>>> +
> >>>>>>>>> static int imx_rproc_detect_mode(struct imx_rproc *priv)
> >>>>>>>>> {
> >>>>>>>>> struct regmap_config config = { .name = "imx-rproc" };
> >>>>>>>>> @@ -689,6
> >>>>>>>>> +745,7 @@ static int imx_rproc_detect_mode(struct imx_rproc
> >>>>>>>>> +*priv)
> >>>>>>>>> struct arm_smccc_res res;
> >>>>>>>>> int ret;
> >>>>>>>>> u32 val;
> >>>>>>>>> + u8 pt;
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> switch (dcfg->method) {
> >>>>>>>>> case IMX_RPROC_NONE:
> >>>>>>>>> @@ -699,6 +756,51 @@ static int imx_rproc_detect_mode(struct
> >>>>>>>> imx_rproc *priv)
> >>>>>>>>> if (res.a0)
> >>>>>>>>> priv->rproc->state = RPROC_DETACHED;
> >>>>>>>>> return 0;
> >>>>>>>>> + case IMX_RPROC_SCU_API:
> >>>>>>>>> + ret = imx_scu_get_handle(&priv->ipc_handle);
> >>>>>>>>> + if (ret)
> >>>>>>>>> + return ret;
> >>>>>>>>> + ret = of_property_read_u32(dev->of_node,
> >>>>>>>>> +"fsl,resource-id",
> >>>>>>>> &priv->rsrc_id);
> >>>>>>>>> + if (ret) {
> >>>>>>>>> + dev_err(dev, "No fsl,resource-id property\n");
> >>>>>>>>> + return ret;
> >>>>>>>>> + }
> >>>>>>>>> +
> >>>>>>>>> + /*
> >>>>>>>>> + * If Mcore resource is not owned by Acore
> >>>>>>>>> +partition, It is
> >>>>>>>> kicked by ROM,
> >>>>>>>>> + * and Linux could only do IPC with Mcore and nothing else.
> >>>>>>>>> + */
> >>>>>>>>> + if (imx_sc_rm_is_resource_owned(priv->ipc_handle,
> >>>>>>>>> +priv-
> >>>>>>>>> rsrc_id))
> >>>>>>>>> + return 0;
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> If imx_sc_rm_is_resource_owned() return '1' than the remote
> >>>>>>>> processor is under Linux's control and what follows below is
> >>>>>>>> not needed.
> >>>>>>>> That is also
> >>>>>>>> coherent with the comment in [1].
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Case 1: If M4 is owned by Linux, here directly return 0.
> >>>>>>> Case 2: If M4 is not owned by Linux, the following code after
> >>>>>>> this line will set state as RPROC_DETACHED.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I understand that part.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Patch 3/6(this patch) is only to support case 2.
> >>>>>>> Patch 4/6 is to support case 1.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Let's leave the subsequent patches alone for now.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> That is in contrast with what is happening in
> >>>>>>>> imx_rproc_put_scu(). There, if the remote processor is _not_
> >>>>>>>> owned by Linux than the condition returns without calling
> >>>>>>>> imx_scu_irq_group_enable() and
> >>>>>>>> imx_scu_irq_unregister_notifier(). That seems to be a bug.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> No. The two functions only needed when M4 is in a separate
> >>>>>>> hardware partition.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> The scu irq is only needed when M4 is out of linux control and
> >>>>>>> need some notification such as M4 is reset by SCU(System Control
> >>> Unit).
> >>>>>>> That linux got
> >>>>>>> notification that M4 is reset by SCU.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I also understand that part.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> What I am underlining here is that when the M4 is independent,
> >>>>>> function
> >>>>>> imx_scu_irq_register_notifier() and imx_scu_irq_group_enable() are
> >>>>>> called but their cleanup equivalent are not called in
> >>>>>> imx_rproc_put_scu() because of the '!'
> >>>>>> in the if() statement.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> you are right, this is bug in my side. It should be as below based
> >>>>> on patch 3/6.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/imx_rproc.c
> >>>>> b/drivers/remoteproc/imx_rproc.c index bcba74e90020..a56aecae00c6
> >>>>> 100644
> >>>>> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/imx_rproc.c
> >>>>> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/imx_rproc.c
> >>>>> @@ -713,7 +713,7 @@ static void imx_rproc_put_scu(struct rproc
> >>>>> *rproc)
> >>>>> if (dcfg->method != IMX_RPROC_SCU_API)
> >>>>> return;
> >>>>>
> >>>>> - if (!imx_sc_rm_is_resource_owned(priv->ipc_handle,
> >>>>> priv->rsrc_id))
> >>>>> + if (imx_sc_rm_is_resource_owned(priv->ipc_handle,
> >>>>> +priv->rsrc_id))
> >>>
> >>> Indeed, which raises questions about how this patchset was tested. And it
> >>> is not the first time we touch base on that.
> >>
> >> Patch 4/6 has this change, anyway I should not mix patch 3,4 here.
> >>
> >>>
> >>>>> return;
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Thanks for detailed reviewing.
> >>>>
> >>>> If you are fine with this change, I could send out V6. Anyway, I'll
> >>>> wait to see if you have other comments in this patchset.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> I am out of time for this patchset and as such will not provide more
> >>> comments on this revision.
> >>
> >> Sure. Thanks for your time. Since you have applied the attach recovery
> >> part, next version will enable this feature in imx rproc.
> >>
> >
> > I would rather not. Please introduce support for the recovery in
> > another patchset, once this one has been merged.
>
> I pushed the button too early, sorry. V6 was out yesterday, but the new
> patch 7/7 is an incremetenl patch to enable attach recovery.
>

Right, I noticed that after replying to you.

> You could ignore patch 7/7 in V6, I will reply their to note. patch
> [1-6]/7 is to achieve same as V5 patchset.
>
> If you need to send V7 which just drop patch 7/7 in V6, please let me know.

It is not a problem if all the new functionality is in a patch on its
own. At least the mental picture I have of the first 6 patches
doesn't change. No need to send a new revision.

>
> Thanks,
> Peng.
>
> >
> >> Thanks,
> >> Peng.
> >>
> >>>
> >>>> Thanks,
> >>>> Peng.
> >>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>> Peng.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> There is also a problem in patch 4/6 associated to that.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> If the upper explanation eliminate your concern, "a problem in
> >>>>>>> patch 4/6" should not be a problem.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> When M4 is owned by Linux, Linux need handle the power domain.
> >>>>>>> If M4 is not owned
> >>>>>>> by Linux, SCU firmware will handle the power domain, and Linux
> >>>>>>> has no permission to touch that.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Thanks
> >>>>>>> Peng
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>>>>> Mathieu
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> [1].
> >>>>>>>> https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2
> >>>>>>>> F%2Felixir
> >>>>>>>> .bootlin.com%2Flinux%2Fv6.0-
> >>>>>>>>
> >>> rc7%2Fsource%2Fdrivers%2Ffirmware%2Fimx%2Frm.c%23L24&data=
> >>>>>>>> 0
> >>>>>>>>
> >>> 5%7C01%7Cpeng.fan%40nxp.com%7Cbe679e9a409a48b834b908daa015d92
> >>>>>>>>
> >>> c%7C686ea1d3bc2b4c6fa92cd99c5c301635%7C0%7C0%7C637998312946913
> >>>>>>>>
> >>> 710%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2lu
> >>>>>>>>
> >>> MzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=
> >>>>>>>>
> >>> JDRvoDGGgEiSmbhj3410V2DNxamZbDmMS0U2GvBnI74%3D&reserved
> >>>>>>>> =0
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> +
> >>>>>>>>> + priv->rproc->state = RPROC_DETACHED;
> >>>>>>>>> + priv->rproc->recovery_disabled = true;
> >>>>>>>>> +
> >>>>>>>>> + /* Get partition id and enable irq in SCFW */
> >>>>>>>>> + ret =
> >>>>>>>>> +imx_sc_rm_get_resource_owner(priv->ipc_handle,
> >>>>>>>> priv->rsrc_id, &pt);
> >>>>>>>>> + if (ret) {
> >>>>>>>>> + dev_err(dev, "not able to get resource
> >>>>>>>>> +owner\n");
> >>>>>>>>> + return ret;
> >>>>>>>>> + }
> >>>>>>>>> +
> >>>>>>>>> + priv->rproc_pt = pt;
> >>>>>>>>> + priv->rproc_nb.notifier_call =
> >>>>>>>>> +imx_rproc_partition_notify;
> >>>>>>>>> +
> >>>>>>>>> + ret =
> >>>>>>>>> +imx_scu_irq_register_notifier(&priv->rproc_nb);
> >>>>>>>>> + if (ret) {
> >>>>>>>>> + dev_warn(dev, "register scu notifier
> >>>>>>>>> +failed.\n");
> >>>>>>>>> + return ret;
> >>>>>>>>> + }
> >>>>>>>>> +
> >>>>>>>>> + ret =
> >>>>>>>> imx_scu_irq_group_enable(IMX_SC_IRQ_GROUP_REBOOTED,
> >>> BIT(priv-
> >>>>>>>>> rproc_pt),
> >>>>>>>>> + true);
> >>>>>>>>> + if (ret) {
> >>>>>>>>> +
> >>>>>>>>> +imx_scu_irq_unregister_notifier(&priv->rproc_nb);
> >>>>>>>>> + dev_warn(dev, "Enable irq failed.\n");
> >>>>>>>>> + return ret;
> >>>>>>>>> + }
> >>>>>>>>> +
> >>>>>>>>> + return 0;
> >>>>>>>>> default:
> >>>>>>>>> break;
> >>>>>>>>> }
> >>>>>>>>> @@ -803,7 +905,7 @@ static int imx_rproc_probe(struct
> >>>>>>>>> platform_device
> >>>>>>>>> *pdev)
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> ret = imx_rproc_clk_enable(priv);
> >>>>>>>>> if (ret)
> >>>>>>>>> - goto err_put_mbox;
> >>>>>>>>> + goto err_put_scu;
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> INIT_WORK(&priv->rproc_work, imx_rproc_vq_work);
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> @@ -820,6 +922,8 @@ static int imx_rproc_probe(struct
> >>>>>>>>> platform_device
> >>>>>>>>> *pdev)
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> err_put_clk:
> >>>>>>>>> clk_disable_unprepare(priv->clk);
> >>>>>>>>> +err_put_scu:
> >>>>>>>>> + imx_rproc_put_scu(rproc);
> >>>>>>>>> err_put_mbox:
> >>>>>>>>> imx_rproc_free_mbox(rproc);
> >>>>>>>>> err_put_wkq:
> >>>>>>>>> @@ -837,6 +941,7 @@ static int imx_rproc_remove(struct
> >>>>>>>> platform_device
> >>>>>>>>> *pdev)
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> clk_disable_unprepare(priv->clk);
> >>>>>>>>> rproc_del(rproc);
> >>>>>>>>> + imx_rproc_put_scu(rproc);
> >>>>>>>>> imx_rproc_free_mbox(rproc);
> >>>>>>>>> destroy_workqueue(priv->workqueue);
> >>>>>>>>> rproc_free(rproc);
> >>>>>>>>> @@ -852,6 +957,7 @@ static const struct of_device_id
> >>>>>>>> imx_rproc_of_match[] = {
> >>>>>>>>> { .compatible = "fsl,imx8mm-cm4", .data =
> >>>>>>>> &imx_rproc_cfg_imx8mq },
> >>>>>>>>> { .compatible = "fsl,imx8mn-cm7", .data =
> >>>>>>>> &imx_rproc_cfg_imx8mn },
> >>>>>>>>> { .compatible = "fsl,imx8mp-cm7", .data =
> >>>>>>>> &imx_rproc_cfg_imx8mn },
> >>>>>>>>> + { .compatible = "fsl,imx8qxp-cm4", .data =
> >>>>>>>> &imx_rproc_cfg_imx8qxp },
> >>>>>>>>> { .compatible = "fsl,imx8ulp-cm33", .data =
> >>>>>>>> &imx_rproc_cfg_imx8ulp },
> >>>>>>>>> { .compatible = "fsl,imx93-cm33", .data =
> >>>>>>>>> &imx_rproc_cfg_imx93 },
> >>>>>>>>> {},
> >>>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>>> 2.37.1
> >>>>>>>>>

Next message: Laurent Pinchart: "Re: [PATCH] drm: do not call detect for connectors which are forced on"
Previous message: Dmitry Torokhov: "Re: [PATCH v6 06/13] ACPI: resources: Add wake_capable parameter to acpi_dev_irq_flags"
In reply to: Peng Fan: "Re: [PATCH V5 3/6] remoteproc: imx_rproc: support attaching to i.MX8QXP M4"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]