Thread (19 messages) 19 messages, 2 authors, 2024-11-21

Re: [PATCH v13 4/7] remoteproc: Introduce release_fw optional operation

From: Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@linaro.org>
Date: 2024-11-20 16:04:17
Also in: linux-devicetree, linux-remoteproc, lkml, op-tee

On Tue, 19 Nov 2024 at 13:38, Mathieu Poirier
[off-list ref] wrote:
On Tue, 19 Nov 2024 at 11:14, Arnaud POULIQUEN
[off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
Hello Mathieu,

On 11/18/24 18:52, Mathieu Poirier wrote:
quoted
On Mon, Nov 04, 2024 at 02:35:12PM +0100, Arnaud Pouliquen wrote:
quoted
This patch updates the rproc_ops struct to include an optional
release_fw function.

The release_fw ops is responsible for releasing the remote processor
firmware image. The ops is called in the following cases:

 - An error occurs in rproc_start() between the loading of the segments and
      the start of the remote processor.
 - after stopping the remote processor.

Signed-off-by: Arnaud Pouliquen <arnaud.pouliquen@foss.st.com>
---
Updates from version V11:
- fix typo in @release_fw comment
---
 drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c | 5 +++++
 include/linux/remoteproc.h           | 3 +++
 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+)
diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
index 7694817f25d4..46863e1ca307 100644
--- a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
+++ b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
@@ -1258,6 +1258,9 @@ static int rproc_alloc_registered_carveouts(struct rproc *rproc)

 static void rproc_release_fw(struct rproc *rproc)
 {
+    if (rproc->ops->release_fw)
+            rproc->ops->release_fw(rproc);
+
     /* Free the copy of the resource table */
     kfree(rproc->cached_table);
     rproc->cached_table = NULL;
@@ -1377,6 +1380,8 @@ static int rproc_start(struct rproc *rproc, const struct firmware *fw)
 unprepare_subdevices:
     rproc_unprepare_subdevices(rproc);
 reset_table_ptr:
+    if (rproc->ops->release_fw)
+            rproc->ops->release_fw(rproc);
     rproc->table_ptr = rproc->cached_table;
I suggest the following:

1) Create two new functions, i.e rproc_load_fw() and rproc_release_fw().  The
only thing those would do is call rproc->ops->load_fw() and
rproc->ops->release_fw(), if they are present.  When a TEE interface is
available, ->load_fw() and ->release_fw() become rproc_tee_load_fw() and
rproc_tee_release_fw().

I'm wondering if it should be ->preload_fw() instead of ->load_fw() ops, as the
->load() op already exists.
I agree that ->load() and ->load_fw() will lead to confusion.  I would
support ->preload_fw() but there is no obvious antonyme.

Since we already have rproc_ops::prepare() and rproc_prepare_device()
I suggest rproc_ops::prepare_fw() and rproc_prepare_fw().  The
corollary would be rproc_ops::unprepare_fw() and rproc_unprepare_fm().
That said, I'm open to other ideas should you be interested in finding
other alternatives.
Actually...  A better approach might to rename rproc::load to
rproc::load_segments.  That way we can use rproc::load_fw() and
rproc_load_fw() without confusion.
quoted
quoted
2) Call rproc_load_fw() in rproc_boot(), just before rproc_fw_boot().  If the
call to rproc_fw_boot() fails, call rproc_release_fw().

3) The same logic applies to rproc_boot_recovery(), i.e call rproc_load_fw()
before rproc_start() and call rproc_release_fw() if rproc_start() fails.

I implemented this and I'm currently testing it.
Thise second part requires a few adjustments to work. The ->load() ops needs to
becomes optional to not be called if the "->preload_fw()" is used.

For that, I propose to return 0 in rproc_load_segments if rproc->ops->load is
NULL and compensate by checking that at least "->preload_fw()" or ->load() is
non-null in rproc_alloc_ops.
I agree.
quoted
Thanks,
Arnaud

quoted
4) Take rproc_tee_load_fw() out of rproc_tee_parse_fw().  It will now be called
in rproc_load_fw().

5) As stated above function rproc_release_fw() now calls rproc_tee_release_fw().
The former is already called in rproc_shutdown() so we are good in that front.

With the above the cached_table management within the core remains the same and
we can get rid of patch 3.7.
quoted
Thanks,
Mathieu
quoted
     return ret;
diff --git a/include/linux/remoteproc.h b/include/linux/remoteproc.h
index 2e0ddcb2d792..08e0187a84d9 100644
--- a/include/linux/remoteproc.h
+++ b/include/linux/remoteproc.h
@@ -381,6 +381,8 @@ enum rsc_handling_status {
  * @panic:  optional callback to react to system panic, core will delay
  *          panic at least the returned number of milliseconds
  * @coredump:         collect firmware dump after the subsystem is shutdown
+ * @release_fw:     optional function to release the firmware image from ROM memories.
+ *          This function is called after stopping the remote processor or in case of an error
  */
 struct rproc_ops {
     int (*prepare)(struct rproc *rproc);
@@ -403,6 +405,7 @@ struct rproc_ops {
     u64 (*get_boot_addr)(struct rproc *rproc, const struct firmware *fw);
     unsigned long (*panic)(struct rproc *rproc);
     void (*coredump)(struct rproc *rproc);
+    void (*release_fw)(struct rproc *rproc);
 };

 /**
--
2.25.1
  
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help