Re: [PATCH v3 02/18] remoteproc: qcom: Move minidump specific data to qcom_minidump.h

[Mukesh Ojha]

On 5/4/2023 6:06 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 04/05/2023 14:26, Mukesh Ojha wrote:
> > On 5/4/2023 5:33 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> > > On 04/05/2023 13:58, Mukesh Ojha wrote:
> > > > On 5/4/2023 5:08 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> > > > > On 03/05/2023 19:02, Mukesh Ojha wrote:
> > > > > > Move minidump specific data types and macros to a separate internal
> > > > > > header(qcom_minidump.h) so that it can be shared among different
> > > > > > Qualcomm drivers.
> > > > >
> > > > > No, this is not internal header. You moved it to global header.
> > > > >
> > > > > There is no reason driver internals should be exposed to other unrelated
> > > > > subsystems.
> > > > >
> > > > > > There is no change in functional behavior after this.
> > > > >
> > > > > It is. You made all these internal symbols available to others.
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > This comes without justification why other drivers needs to access
> > > > > private and internal data. It does not look correct design. NAK.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks for catching outdated commit text, will fix the commit with
> > > > more descriptive reasoning.
> > > >
> > > > It has to be global so that co-processor minidump and apss minidump can
> > > > share data structure and they are lying in different directory.
> > >
> > > Then you should not share all the internals of memory layout but only
> > > few pieces necessary to talk with minidump driver. The minidump driver
> > > should organize everything how it wants.
> >
> > These are core data structure which is shared with boot firmware and the
> > one's are moved here all are required by minidump driver .
>
> I am not sure if I understand correctly. If they are all required by
> minidump driver, then this must not be in include, but stay with
> minidump. Remoteproc then should not touch it.
>
> I don't understand why internals of minidump should be important for
> remoteproc. If they are, means you broken encapsulation.
>
> > If you follow here[1], i raised by concern to make this particular one's
> > as private and later to avoid confusion went with single header.
> > But if others agree, I will keep the one that get shared with minidump
> > as separate one or if relative path of headers are allowed that can make
> > it private between these drivers(which i don't think, will be allowed or
> > recommended).
>
> Let's be specific: why MD_REGION_VALID must be available for remoteproc
> or any other driver after introducing qcom minidump driver?

Forget about this driver for a moment.

I am not sure  how much you know about existing qcom_minidump()
implementation and why is it there in first place in remoteproc
code in driver/remoteproc/qcom_common.c

The idea is, remoteproc co-processor like adsp/cdsp etc. may have their
static predefined region (segments) to be collected on their crash which 
is what exactly existing qcom_minidump() is doing.

Now, after this minidump series, APSS (linux) will have it's
own of collecting linux client region independent of whether
remoteproc minidump collection.

I think, are you hinting to move all minidump related code from 
remoteproc to qcom_minidump driver, is this what are you trying
to say ?

-- Mukesh
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof