Re: [PATCH v7 3/4] remoteproc: zynqmp: add pm domains support

From: Mathieu Poirier
Date: Thu Nov 23 2023 - 13:12:02 EST

Next message: Alan Stern: "Re: [PATCH] usb: hubs: Decrease IN-endpoint poll interval for Microchip USB491x hub"
Previous message: Andrey Konovalov: "Re: [PATCH RFC 00/20] kasan: save mempool stack traces"
In reply to: Tanmay Shah: "Re: [PATCH v7 3/4] remoteproc: zynqmp: add pm domains support"
Next in thread: Mathieu Poirier: "Re: [PATCH v7 3/4] remoteproc: zynqmp: add pm domains support"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On Wed, Nov 22, 2023 at 03:00:36PM -0600, Tanmay Shah wrote:
> Hi Mathieu,
>
> Please find my comments below.
>
> On 11/21/23 4:59 PM, Mathieu Poirier wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Fri, Nov 17, 2023 at 09:42:37AM -0800, Tanmay Shah wrote:
> > > Use TCM pm domains extracted from device-tree
> > > to power on/off TCM using general pm domain framework.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Tanmay Shah <tanmay.shah@xxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > >
> > > Changes in v7:
> > > - %s/pm_dev1/pm_dev_core0/r
> > > - %s/pm_dev_link1/pm_dev_core0_link/r
> > > - %s/pm_dev2/pm_dev_core1/r
> > > - %s/pm_dev_link2/pm_dev_core1_link/r
> > > - remove pm_domain_id check to move next patch
> > > - add comment about how 1st entry in pm domain list is used
> > > - fix loop when jump to fail_add_pm_domains loop
> > >
> > > drivers/remoteproc/xlnx_r5_remoteproc.c | 215 +++++++++++++++++++++++-
> > > 1 file changed, 212 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/xlnx_r5_remoteproc.c b/drivers/remoteproc/xlnx_r5_remoteproc.c
> > > index 4395edea9a64..22bccc5075a0 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/remoteproc/xlnx_r5_remoteproc.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/xlnx_r5_remoteproc.c
> > > @@ -16,6 +16,7 @@
> > > #include <linux/of_reserved_mem.h>
> > > #include <linux/platform_device.h>
> > > #include <linux/remoteproc.h>
> > > +#include <linux/pm_domain.h>
> > >
> > > #include "remoteproc_internal.h"
> > >
> > > @@ -102,6 +103,12 @@ static const struct mem_bank_data zynqmp_tcm_banks_lockstep[] = {
> > > * @rproc: rproc handle
> > > * @pm_domain_id: RPU CPU power domain id
> > > * @ipi: pointer to mailbox information
> > > + * @num_pm_dev: number of tcm pm domain devices for this core
> > > + * @pm_dev_core0: pm domain virtual devices for power domain framework
> > > + * @pm_dev_core0_link: pm domain device links after registration
> > > + * @pm_dev_core1: used only in lockstep mode. second core's pm domain virtual devices
> > > + * @pm_dev_core1_link: used only in lockstep mode. second core's pm device links after
> > > + * registration
> > > */
> > > struct zynqmp_r5_core {
> > > struct device *dev;
> > > @@ -111,6 +118,11 @@ struct zynqmp_r5_core {
> > > struct rproc *rproc;
> > > u32 pm_domain_id;
> > > struct mbox_info *ipi;
> > > + int num_pm_dev;
> > > + struct device **pm_dev_core0;
> > > + struct device_link **pm_dev_core0_link;
> > > + struct device **pm_dev_core1;
> > > + struct device_link **pm_dev_core1_link;
> > > };
> > >
> > > /**
> > > @@ -651,7 +663,8 @@ static int add_tcm_carveout_lockstep_mode(struct rproc *rproc)
> > > ZYNQMP_PM_CAPABILITY_ACCESS, 0,
> > > ZYNQMP_PM_REQUEST_ACK_BLOCKING);
> > > if (ret < 0) {
> > > - dev_err(dev, "failed to turn on TCM 0x%x", pm_domain_id);
> > > + dev_err(dev, "failed to turn on TCM 0x%x",
> > > + pm_domain_id);
> >
> > Spurious change, you should have caught that.
>
> Ack, need to observe changes more closely before sending them.
>
> >
> > > goto release_tcm_lockstep;
> > > }
> > >
> > > @@ -758,6 +771,189 @@ static int zynqmp_r5_parse_fw(struct rproc *rproc, const struct firmware *fw)
> > > return ret;
> > > }
> > >
> > > +static void zynqmp_r5_remove_pm_domains(struct rproc *rproc)
> > > +{
> > > + struct zynqmp_r5_core *r5_core = rproc->priv;
> > > + struct device *dev = r5_core->dev;
> > > + struct zynqmp_r5_cluster *cluster;
> > > + int i;
> > > +
> > > + cluster = platform_get_drvdata(to_platform_device(dev->parent));
> > > +
> > > + for (i = 1; i < r5_core->num_pm_dev; i++) {
> > > + device_link_del(r5_core->pm_dev_core0_link[i]);
> > > + dev_pm_domain_detach(r5_core->pm_dev_core0[i], false);
> > > + }
> > > +
> > > + kfree(r5_core->pm_dev_core0);
> > > + r5_core->pm_dev_core0 = NULL;
> > > + kfree(r5_core->pm_dev_core0_link);
> > > + r5_core->pm_dev_core0_link = NULL;
> > > +
> > > + if (cluster->mode == SPLIT_MODE) {
> > > + r5_core->num_pm_dev = 0;
> > > + return;
> > > + }
> > > +
> > > + for (i = 1; i < r5_core->num_pm_dev; i++) {
> > > + device_link_del(r5_core->pm_dev_core1_link[i]);
> > > + dev_pm_domain_detach(r5_core->pm_dev_core1[i], false);
> > > + }
> > > +
> > > + kfree(r5_core->pm_dev_core1);
> > > + r5_core->pm_dev_core1 = NULL;
> > > + kfree(r5_core->pm_dev_core1_link);
> > > + r5_core->pm_dev_core1_link = NULL;
> > > + r5_core->num_pm_dev = 0;
> > > +}
> > > +
> > > +static int zynqmp_r5_add_pm_domains(struct rproc *rproc)
> > > +{
> > > + struct zynqmp_r5_core *r5_core = rproc->priv;
> > > + struct device *dev = r5_core->dev, *dev2;
> > > + struct zynqmp_r5_cluster *cluster;
> > > + struct platform_device *pdev;
> > > + struct device_node *np;
> > > + int i, j, num_pm_dev, ret;
> > > +
> > > + cluster = dev_get_drvdata(dev->parent);
> > > +
> > > + /* get number of power-domains */
> > > + num_pm_dev = of_count_phandle_with_args(r5_core->np, "power-domains",
> > > + "#power-domain-cells");
> > > +
> > > + if (num_pm_dev <= 0)
> > > + return -EINVAL;
> > > +
> > > + r5_core->pm_dev_core0 = kcalloc(num_pm_dev,
> > > + sizeof(struct device *),
> > > + GFP_KERNEL);
> > > + if (!r5_core->pm_dev_core0)
> > > + ret = -ENOMEM;
> > > +
> > > + r5_core->pm_dev_core0_link = kcalloc(num_pm_dev,
> > > + sizeof(struct device_link *),
> > > + GFP_KERNEL);
> > > + if (!r5_core->pm_dev_core0_link) {
> > > + kfree(r5_core->pm_dev_core0);
> > > + r5_core->pm_dev_core0 = NULL;
> > > + return -ENOMEM;
> > > + }
> > > +
> > > + r5_core->num_pm_dev = num_pm_dev;
> > > +
> > > + /*
> > > + * start from 2nd entry in power-domains property list as
> > > + * for zynqmp we only add TCM power domains and not core's power domain.
> > > + * 1st entry is used to configure r5 operation mode.
> >
> > You are still not saying _where_ ->pm_dev_core0[0] gets added.
>
> So, pm_dev_core0[0] isn't really need to be added for zynqmp platform, as firmware starts it with call,
>
> zynqmp_pm_request_wake during rproc_start callback. I will document this in next
>

That is exactly what I am looking for. That way people don't have to go through
the entire driver trying to figure out what is happening with pm_dev_core[0].

I'm also not sure about the power-up order. Logically the TCMs should be
powered up before the R5 in order to put code in them. The R5s are powered in
zynqmp_r5_rproc_start() but I am unclear as to where in the boot sequence the
TCMs are powered - can you expand on that?

> revision. For new platforms pm_dev_core0[0] will be added in future.

Now I'm really confused - what do you mean by "pm_dev_core0[0] will be added in
future"?

>
> I hope this meets expectations.
>
>
> >
> > > + */
> > > + for (i = 1; i < r5_core->num_pm_dev; i++) {
> > > + r5_core->pm_dev_core0[i] = dev_pm_domain_attach_by_id(dev, i);
> > > + if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(r5_core->pm_dev_core0[i])) {
> >
> > Here IS_ERR_OR_NULL() is used while two if conditions for NULL and an error
> > code are used in the loop for the lockstep mode. Please pick one heuristic and
> > stick with it. I have no preference on which one.
>
> Ok, I think IS_ERR_OR_NULL is more cleaner, I will address it in next revision.
>
>
> >
> > > + dev_dbg(dev, "failed to attach pm domain %d, ret=%ld\n", i,
> > > + PTR_ERR(r5_core->pm_dev_core0[i]));
> > > + ret = -EINVAL;
> > > + goto fail_add_pm_domains;
> > > + }
> > > + r5_core->pm_dev_core0_link[i] = device_link_add(dev,
> > > + r5_core->pm_dev_core0[i],
> > > + DL_FLAG_STATELESS |
> > > + DL_FLAG_RPM_ACTIVE |
> > > + DL_FLAG_PM_RUNTIME);
> > > + if (!r5_core->pm_dev_core0_link[i]) {
> > > + dev_pm_domain_detach(r5_core->pm_dev_core0[i], true);
> > > + r5_core->pm_dev_core0[i] = NULL;
> > > + ret = -EINVAL;
> > > + goto fail_add_pm_domains;
> > > + }
> > > + }
> > > +
> > > + if (cluster->mode == SPLIT_MODE)
> > > + return 0;
> > > +
> > > + r5_core->pm_dev_core1 = kcalloc(num_pm_dev,
> > > + sizeof(struct device *),
> > > + GFP_KERNEL);
> > > + if (!r5_core->pm_dev_core1) {
> > > + ret = -ENOMEM;
> > > + goto fail_add_pm_domains;
> > > + }
> > > +
> > > + r5_core->pm_dev_core1_link = kcalloc(num_pm_dev,
> > > + sizeof(struct device_link *),
> > > + GFP_KERNEL);
> > > + if (!r5_core->pm_dev_core1_link) {
> > > + kfree(r5_core->pm_dev_core1);
> > > + r5_core->pm_dev_core1 = NULL;
> > > + ret = -ENOMEM;
> > > + goto fail_add_pm_domains;
> > > + }
> > > +
> > > + /* get second core's device to detach its power-domains */
> > > + np = of_get_next_child(cluster->dev->of_node, of_node_get(dev->of_node));
> > > +
> > > + pdev = of_find_device_by_node(np);
> > > + if (!pdev) {
> > > + dev_err(cluster->dev, "core1 platform device not available\n");
> > > + kfree(r5_core->pm_dev_core1);
> > > + kfree(r5_core->pm_dev_core1_link);
> > > + r5_core->pm_dev_core1 = NULL;
> > > + r5_core->pm_dev_core1_link = NULL;
> > > + ret = -EINVAL;
> > > + goto fail_add_pm_domains;
> > > + }
> > > +
> > > + dev2 = &pdev->dev;
> > > +
> > > + /* for zynqmp we only add TCM power domains and not core's power domain */
> > > + for (j = 1; j < r5_core->num_pm_dev; j++) {
> > > + r5_core->pm_dev_core1[j] = dev_pm_domain_attach_by_id(dev2, j);
> > > + if (!r5_core->pm_dev_core1[j]) {
> > > + dev_dbg(dev, "can't attach to pm domain %d\n", j);
> > > + ret = -EINVAL;
> > > + goto fail_add_pm_domains_lockstep;
> > > + } else if (IS_ERR(r5_core->pm_dev_core1[j])) {
> > > + dev_dbg(dev, "can't attach to pm domain %d\n", j);
> > > + ret = PTR_ERR(r5_core->pm_dev_core1[j]);
> > > + goto fail_add_pm_domains_lockstep;
> > > + }
> > > +
> > > + r5_core->pm_dev_core1_link[j] = device_link_add(dev,
> > > + r5_core->pm_dev_core1[j],
> > > + DL_FLAG_STATELESS |
> > > + DL_FLAG_RPM_ACTIVE |
> > > + DL_FLAG_PM_RUNTIME);
> > > + if (!r5_core->pm_dev_core1_link[j]) {
> > > + dev_pm_domain_detach(r5_core->pm_dev_core1[j], true);
> > > + r5_core->pm_dev_core1[j] = NULL;
> > > + ret = -ENODEV;
> > > + goto fail_add_pm_domains_lockstep;
> > > + }
> > > + }
> > > +
> > > +fail_add_pm_domains_lockstep:
> > > + while (--j >= 0) {
> > > + device_link_del(r5_core->pm_dev_core1_link[j]);
> > > + dev_pm_domain_detach(r5_core->pm_dev_core1[j], true);
> > > + }
> > > + kfree(r5_core->pm_dev_core1);
> > > + r5_core->pm_dev_core1 = NULL;
> > > + kfree(r5_core->pm_dev_core1_link);
> > > + r5_core->pm_dev_core1_link = NULL;
> > > +
> > > +fail_add_pm_domains:
> > > + while (--i >= 0) {
> > > + device_link_del(r5_core->pm_dev_core0_link[i]);
> > > + dev_pm_domain_detach(r5_core->pm_dev_core0[i], true);
> > > + }
> > > + kfree(r5_core->pm_dev_core0);
> > > + r5_core->pm_dev_core0 = NULL;
> > > + kfree(r5_core->pm_dev_core0_link);
> > > + r5_core->pm_dev_core0_link = NULL;
> > > +
> >
> > The error path is much cleaner and readable now.
> >
> > I will continue tomorrow.
> >
> > Mathieu
> >
> > > + return ret;
> > > +}
> > > +
> > > /**
> > > * zynqmp_r5_rproc_prepare()
> > > * adds carveouts for TCM bank and reserved memory regions
> > > @@ -770,19 +966,30 @@ static int zynqmp_r5_rproc_prepare(struct rproc *rproc)
> > > {
> > > int ret;
> > >
> > > + ret = zynqmp_r5_add_pm_domains(rproc);
> > > + if (ret) {
> > > + dev_err(&rproc->dev, "failed to add pm domains\n");
> > > + return ret;
> > > + }
> > > +
> > > ret = add_tcm_banks(rproc);
> > > if (ret) {
> > > dev_err(&rproc->dev, "failed to get TCM banks, err %d\n", ret);
> > > - return ret;
> > > + goto fail_prepare;
> > > }
> > >
> > > ret = add_mem_regions_carveout(rproc);
> > > if (ret) {
> > > dev_err(&rproc->dev, "failed to get reserve mem regions %d\n", ret);
> > > - return ret;
> > > + goto fail_prepare;
> > > }
> > >
> > > return 0;
> > > +
> > > +fail_prepare:
> > > + zynqmp_r5_remove_pm_domains(rproc);
> > > +
> > > + return ret;
> > > }
> > >
> > > /**
> > > @@ -801,6 +1008,8 @@ static int zynqmp_r5_rproc_unprepare(struct rproc *rproc)
> > >
> > > r5_core = rproc->priv;
> > >
> > > + zynqmp_r5_remove_pm_domains(rproc);
> > > +
> > > for (i = 0; i < r5_core->tcm_bank_count; i++) {
> > > pm_domain_id = r5_core->tcm_banks[i]->pm_domain_id;
> > > if (zynqmp_pm_release_node(pm_domain_id))
> > > --
> > > 2.25.1
> > >

Next message: Alan Stern: "Re: [PATCH] usb: hubs: Decrease IN-endpoint poll interval for Microchip USB491x hub"
Previous message: Andrey Konovalov: "Re: [PATCH RFC 00/20] kasan: save mempool stack traces"
In reply to: Tanmay Shah: "Re: [PATCH v7 3/4] remoteproc: zynqmp: add pm domains support"
Next in thread: Mathieu Poirier: "Re: [PATCH v7 3/4] remoteproc: zynqmp: add pm domains support"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]