[PATCH V5 0/5] soc: imx: add scu firmware api support
From: aisheng.dong@nxp.com (A.s. Dong)
Date: 2018-09-06 03:21:39
Hi Sasha,
-----Original Message----- From: Sascha Hauer [mailto:s.hauer at pengutronix.de] Sent: Monday, September 3, 2018 7:45 PM On Mon, Sep 03, 2018 at 08:57:36AM +0000, A.s. Dong wrote:quoted
Hi Sascha,quoted
-----Original Message----- From: A.s. Dong Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2018 4:35 PM To: Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@pengutronix.de>[...]quoted
quoted
quoted
The original point is to separate the SCU service API implementation from the client drivers. Client drivers don't have to know the internal details of the API implementation, they just use the service API provided by SCU firmware. API implementation and client users will bemaintained independently. I would buy this argument if the 'API implementation' was more than a shim layer that directly translates between function arguments and amessage struct.quoted
With this you effectively can't change the API implementation without changing the API you provide to the client drivers.In reality, the API implementation could change without changing the API prototype. The API is defined in a more generic way and less possible to change. But the internal implementation is allowed to change if the firmwareupdates.quoted
quoted
e.g. protocol params layout and size and etc. This way give us a clear separation between API internals and client users which are more like to be maintained independently. And it may also help if we want to support old firmware due to API internal implementation changes. (And note that SCU firmware supports many functions, distribute them into various drivers may cause a bit mess. Some of them may get troubles on finding a proper place to put.)Examples?
Take sc_misc_set_control as example which is widely used by various client drivers.
Encoding message in driver may cause many duplicated code.
Cscope tag: sc_misc_set_control
# line filename / context / line
1 206 drivers/clk/imx/clk-divider-scu.c <<clk_divider3_scu_set_rate>>
sci_err = sc_misc_set_control(ccm_ipc_handle, clk->rsrc_id,
2 372 drivers/clk/imx/clk-gate-scu.c <<clk_gate3_scu_prepare>>
return sc_misc_set_control(ccm_ipc_handle,
4 319 drivers/clk/imx/clk-mux-scu.c <<clk_mux_gpr_scu_set_parent>>
sc_misc_set_control(ccm_ipc_handle,
5 128 drivers/gpu/drm/imx/hdp/imx-hdp.c <<imx8qm_pixel_link_validate>>
sciErr = sc_misc_set_control(hdp->ipcHndl, SC_R_DC_0,
10 432 drivers/gpu/drm/imx/hdp/imx-hdp.c <<imx8qm_dp_pixel_clock_set_rate>>
sc_misc_set_control(ipc_handle, SC_R_HDMI, SC_C_MODE, 1);
11 339 drivers/gpu/drm/imx/imx-ldb.c <<dpu_pixel_link_validate>>
sciErr = sc_misc_set_control(ipcHndl, SC_R_DC_0,
30 271 drivers/gpu/drm/imx/nwl_dsi-imx.c <<imx8q_dsi_poweron>>
sci_err = sc_misc_set_control(ipc_handle,
41 1544 drivers/gpu/imx/dpu/dpu-common.c <<dpu_pixel_link_init>>
sciErr = sc_misc_set_control(ipcHndl, SC_R_DC_0, SC_C_KACHUNK_CNT, 32);
58 1612 drivers/gpu/imx/dpu/dpu-common.c <<dpu_pixel_link_init>>
sciErr = sc_misc_set_control(ipcHndl, SC_R_DC_1, SC_C_SYNC_CTRL1, 0);
59 147 drivers/gpu/imx/dpu/dpu-framegen.c <<dpu_pixel_link_enable>>
sciErr = sc_misc_set_control(ipcHndl, SC_R_DC_0,
65 312 drivers/gpu/imx/imx8_dprc.c <<dprc_dpu_gpr_configure>>
sciErr = sc_misc_set_control(ipcHndl, dprc->sc_resource,
67 573 drivers/media/platform/imx8/hdmi/mxc-hdmi-rx.c <<imx8qm_hdmi_phy_reset>>
sciErr = sc_misc_set_control(hdmi_rx->ipcHndl, SC_R_HDMI_RX, SC_C_PHY_RESET, reset);
68 139 drivers/media/platform/imx8/mxc-mipi-csi2.c <<mipi_sc_fw_init>>
sciErr = sc_misc_set_control(ipcHndl, rsrc_id, SC_C_MIPI_RESET, enable);
69 1261 drivers/mxc/gpu-viv/hal/os/linux/kernel/platform/freescale/gc_hal_kernel_platform_imx.c <<set_power>>
sc_err_t sciErr = sc_misc_set_control(gpu_ipcHandle, priv->sc_gpu_pid[gpu], SC_C_ID, gpu);
72 230 drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/fec_fixup.c <<imx8qm_ipg_stop_enable>>
sc_err = sc_misc_set_control(ipc_handle, rsrc_id, SC_C_IPG_STOP, val);
73 187 drivers/phy/phy-mixel-mipi-dsi.c <<mixel_mipi_phy_enable>>
sci_err = sc_misc_set_control(ipc_handle,
74 794 sound/soc/fsl/fsl_dsp.c <<fsl_dsp_probe>>
sciErr = sc_misc_set_control(dsp_priv->dsp_ipcHandle, SC_R_DSP,
...
quoted
quoted
So aren't those more valuable comparing to move SCU APIs into clientdrivers?quoted
quoted
And current kernel users (arm scpi/scmi, ti sci) already do like this... why not i.MX? Sorry if I still not get your point. Please help clarify a bit more if I missed something..Please let me know if you still believe moving SCU API implementation into each client driver is a more reasonable way to go, then i will do it as I trust your professionality.Yes, I still think that. I still think the 1:1 mapping between messages and function calls is an unnecessary overhead.
Okay, let's do that way first if you still think it's proper. BTW, do you have any comment about the MU usage in Patch 2/5 ? [V5,2/5] soc: imx: add SC firmware IPC and APIs https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10570551/ As this patch may not change much even changing to new approach, except moving drivers/soc/imx/sc/main/rpc.h under include/soc/imx to allow drivers to touch the internal details of SCU API implementation. So I guess this version does not affect review process. Regards Dong Aisheng
Sascha -- Pengutronix e.K. | | Industrial Linux Solutions | https://emea01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww. pengutronix.de%2F&data=02%7C01%7Caisheng.dong%40nxp.com%7Ca0 3cf22e3f194f921f2d08d61192a293%7C686ea1d3bc2b4c6fa92cd99c5c30163 5%7C0%7C0%7C636715718821871337&sdata=usMYj5iYuKFhqBU2HMHI gGL8w0FTMQ632a6HiTotNoc%3D&reserved=0 | Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 | Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 |