| Message ID | 1485866156-6364-5-git-send-email-loic.pallardy@st.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Superseded |
| Headers | show |
On 01/31/2017 01:35 PM, Loic PALLARDY wrote: > Remoteproc doesn't check if firmware requests fixed > addresses for carveout regions. > Current assumption is that platform specific driver is in > charge of coprocessor specific memory region allocation and > remoteproc core doesn't have to handle them. > If a da or a pa is specified in firmware resource table, remoteproc > core doesn't have to perform any allocation. > Access to carveout will be done thanks to rproc_da_to_pa function, > which will provide virtual address on carveout region allocated > by platform specific driver. > > Signed-off-by: Loic Pallardy <loic.pallardy@st.com> Acked-and-tested-by: Hugues Fruchet <hugues.fruchet@st.com> Tested on B2260 ST Platform with st-delta video decoder V4L2 kernel driver (http://www.mail-archive.com/linux-media@vger.kernel.org/msg107644.html). > --- > No change since V1 > > drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c | 5 +++++ > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c > index 90b05c7..dd63ceed 100644 > --- a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c > +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c > @@ -622,6 +622,11 @@ static int rproc_handle_carveout(struct rproc *rproc, > dev_dbg(dev, "carveout rsc: name: %s, da 0x%x, pa 0x%x, len 0x%x, flags 0x%x\n", > rsc->name, rsc->da, rsc->pa, rsc->len, rsc->flags); > > + if (rsc->pa != FW_RSC_ADDR_ANY || rsc->da != FW_RSC_ADDR_ANY) { > + dev_dbg(dev, "carveout already allocated by low level driver\n"); > + return 0; > + } > + > carveout = kzalloc(sizeof(*carveout), GFP_KERNEL); > if (!carveout) > return -ENOMEM; > >
On Tue 31 Jan 04:35 PST 2017, Loic Pallardy wrote: > Remoteproc doesn't check if firmware requests fixed > addresses for carveout regions. > Current assumption is that platform specific driver is in > charge of coprocessor specific memory region allocation and > remoteproc core doesn't have to handle them. > If a da or a pa is specified in firmware resource table, remoteproc > core doesn't have to perform any allocation. > Access to carveout will be done thanks to rproc_da_to_pa function, > which will provide virtual address on carveout region allocated > by platform specific driver. > > Signed-off-by: Loic Pallardy <loic.pallardy@st.com> > --- > No change since V1 > > drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c | 5 +++++ > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c > index 90b05c7..dd63ceed 100644 > --- a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c > +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c > @@ -622,6 +622,11 @@ static int rproc_handle_carveout(struct rproc *rproc, > dev_dbg(dev, "carveout rsc: name: %s, da 0x%x, pa 0x%x, len 0x%x, flags 0x%x\n", > rsc->name, rsc->da, rsc->pa, rsc->len, rsc->flags); > > + if (rsc->pa != FW_RSC_ADDR_ANY || rsc->da != FW_RSC_ADDR_ANY) { For devices with an IOMMU it's valid to specify "da" and have the allocated region mapped there. So this is not correct. Regards, Bjorn -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-remoteproc" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> -----Original Message----- > From: Bjorn Andersson [mailto:bjorn.andersson@linaro.org] > Sent: Thursday, February 09, 2017 2:55 AM > To: Loic PALLARDY <loic.pallardy@st.com> > Cc: ohad@wizery.com; lee.jones@linaro.org; linux- > remoteproc@vger.kernel.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; > kernel@stlinux.com; Patrice CHOTARD <patrice.chotard@st.com>; Hugues > FRUCHET <hugues.fruchet@st.com>; peter.griffin@linaro.org > Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 4/4] remoteproc: core: don't allocate carveout if pa or > da are defined > > On Tue 31 Jan 04:35 PST 2017, Loic Pallardy wrote: > > > Remoteproc doesn't check if firmware requests fixed > > addresses for carveout regions. > > Current assumption is that platform specific driver is in > > charge of coprocessor specific memory region allocation and > > remoteproc core doesn't have to handle them. > > If a da or a pa is specified in firmware resource table, remoteproc > > core doesn't have to perform any allocation. > > Access to carveout will be done thanks to rproc_da_to_pa function, > > which will provide virtual address on carveout region allocated > > by platform specific driver. > > > > Signed-off-by: Loic Pallardy <loic.pallardy@st.com> > > --- > > No change since V1 > > > > drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c | 5 +++++ > > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c > b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c > > index 90b05c7..dd63ceed 100644 > > --- a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c > > +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c > > @@ -622,6 +622,11 @@ static int rproc_handle_carveout(struct rproc > *rproc, > > dev_dbg(dev, "carveout rsc: name: %s, da 0x%x, pa 0x%x, len 0x%x, > flags 0x%x\n", > > rsc->name, rsc->da, rsc->pa, rsc->len, rsc->flags); > > > > + if (rsc->pa != FW_RSC_ADDR_ANY || rsc->da != > FW_RSC_ADDR_ANY) { > > For devices with an IOMMU it's valid to specify "da" and have the > allocated region mapped there. So this is not correct. You're right, moreover patch series touch only to pa, so even if da behavior should be changed, should be done in a dedicated patch. I'll send a V4. Regards, Loic > > Regards, > Bjorn -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-remoteproc" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c index 90b05c7..dd63ceed 100644 --- a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c @@ -622,6 +622,11 @@ static int rproc_handle_carveout(struct rproc *rproc, dev_dbg(dev, "carveout rsc: name: %s, da 0x%x, pa 0x%x, len 0x%x, flags 0x%x\n", rsc->name, rsc->da, rsc->pa, rsc->len, rsc->flags); + if (rsc->pa != FW_RSC_ADDR_ANY || rsc->da != FW_RSC_ADDR_ANY) { + dev_dbg(dev, "carveout already allocated by low level driver\n"); + return 0; + } + carveout = kzalloc(sizeof(*carveout), GFP_KERNEL); if (!carveout) return -ENOMEM;
Remoteproc doesn't check if firmware requests fixed addresses for carveout regions. Current assumption is that platform specific driver is in charge of coprocessor specific memory region allocation and remoteproc core doesn't have to handle them. If a da or a pa is specified in firmware resource table, remoteproc core doesn't have to perform any allocation. Access to carveout will be done thanks to rproc_da_to_pa function, which will provide virtual address on carveout region allocated by platform specific driver. Signed-off-by: Loic Pallardy <loic.pallardy@st.com> --- No change since V1 drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c | 5 +++++ 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)