| Message ID | 20221130134052.7513-3-devarsht@ti.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Superseded |
| Headers | show |
| Series | Add single core R5F IPC for AM62 SoC family | expand |
Hi Devarsh, Please find my comments below. On 11/30/22 6:40 PM, Devarsh Thakkar wrote: > CAUTION: This message has originated from an External Source. Please use proper judgment and caution when opening attachments, clicking links, or responding to this email. > > > AM62 and AM62A SoCs use single core R5F which is a new scenario > different than the one being used with CLUSTER_MODE_SINGLECPU > which is for utilizing a single core from a set of cores available > in R5F cluster present in the SoC. > > To support this single core scenario map it with > newly defined CLUSTER_MODE_NONE and use it when > compatible is set to ti,am62-r5fss. > > Signed-off-by: Devarsh Thakkar <devarsht@ti.com> > --- > V2: Fix indentation and ordering issues as per review comments > --- > drivers/remoteproc/ti_k3_r5_remoteproc.c | 55 ++++++++++++++++++------ > 1 file changed, 43 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/ti_k3_r5_remoteproc.c b/drivers/remoteproc/ti_k3_r5_remoteproc.c > index 0481926c6975..9698b29a0b56 100644 > --- a/drivers/remoteproc/ti_k3_r5_remoteproc.c > +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/ti_k3_r5_remoteproc.c > @@ -74,11 +74,13 @@ struct k3_r5_mem { > * Split mode : AM65x, J721E, J7200 and AM64x SoCs > * LockStep mode : AM65x, J721E and J7200 SoCs > * Single-CPU mode : AM64x SoCs only > + * None : AM62x, AM62A SoCs > */ > enum cluster_mode { > CLUSTER_MODE_SPLIT = 0, > CLUSTER_MODE_LOCKSTEP, > CLUSTER_MODE_SINGLECPU, > + CLUSTER_MODE_NONE, > }; > > /** > @@ -86,11 +88,13 @@ enum cluster_mode { > * @tcm_is_double: flag to denote the larger unified TCMs in certain modes > * @tcm_ecc_autoinit: flag to denote the auto-initialization of TCMs for ECC > * @single_cpu_mode: flag to denote if SoC/IP supports Single-CPU mode > + * @is_single_core: flag to denote if SoC/IP has only single core R5 > */ > struct k3_r5_soc_data { > bool tcm_is_double; > bool tcm_ecc_autoinit; > bool single_cpu_mode; > + bool is_single_core; If you are providing this data, then ignore parsing cluster-mode property. This will make change very simple. I believe this would save you any modification in bindings as well as cluster-mode property is optional anyway. Also, "enum cluster_mode" reflects cluster-mode values from bindings document except proper soc compatible. I don't see new value added in bindings document i.e. only [0 -> split, 1 -> lockstep, 2 -> single cpu] are defined. If new enum is introduced in driver, it is expected to reflect in bindings i.e. [3 -> cluster-mode none] to avoid any confusion. I believe it is duplicate logic if you are providing "is_single_core" information here and introduce CLUSTER_MODE_NONE as well. May be I am missing something, but I don't see any use of providing extra value CLUSTER_MODE_NONE if "is_single_core" is set in the driver. So, simple solutions is just to avoid parsing cluster-mode property if is_single_core is set in the driver. Hope this helps. Thanks, Tanmay > }; > > /** > @@ -838,7 +842,8 @@ static int k3_r5_rproc_configure(struct k3_r5_rproc *kproc) > > core0 = list_first_entry(&cluster->cores, struct k3_r5_core, elem); > if (cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_LOCKSTEP || > - cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_SINGLECPU) { > + cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_SINGLECPU || > + cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_NONE) { > core = core0; > } else { > core = kproc->core; > @@ -853,7 +858,7 @@ static int k3_r5_rproc_configure(struct k3_r5_rproc *kproc) > boot_vec, cfg, ctrl, stat); > > /* check if only Single-CPU mode is supported on applicable SoCs */ > - if (cluster->soc_data->single_cpu_mode) { > + if (cluster->soc_data->single_cpu_mode || cluster->soc_data->is_single_core) { > single_cpu = > !!(stat & PROC_BOOT_STATUS_FLAG_R5_SINGLECORE_ONLY); > if (single_cpu && cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_SPLIT) { > @@ -1074,6 +1079,7 @@ static void k3_r5_adjust_tcm_sizes(struct k3_r5_rproc *kproc) > > if (cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_LOCKSTEP || > cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_SINGLECPU || > + cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_NONE || > !cluster->soc_data->tcm_is_double) > return; > > @@ -1147,7 +1153,9 @@ static int k3_r5_rproc_configure_mode(struct k3_r5_rproc *kproc) > atcm_enable = cfg & PROC_BOOT_CFG_FLAG_R5_ATCM_EN ? 1 : 0; > btcm_enable = cfg & PROC_BOOT_CFG_FLAG_R5_BTCM_EN ? 1 : 0; > loczrama = cfg & PROC_BOOT_CFG_FLAG_R5_TCM_RSTBASE ? 1 : 0; > - if (cluster->soc_data->single_cpu_mode) { > + if (cluster->soc_data->is_single_core) { > + mode = CLUSTER_MODE_NONE; > + } else if (cluster->soc_data->single_cpu_mode) { > mode = cfg & PROC_BOOT_CFG_FLAG_R5_SINGLE_CORE ? > CLUSTER_MODE_SINGLECPU : CLUSTER_MODE_SPLIT; > } else { > @@ -1271,7 +1279,8 @@ static int k3_r5_cluster_rproc_init(struct platform_device *pdev) > > /* create only one rproc in lockstep mode or single-cpu mode */ > if (cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_LOCKSTEP || > - cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_SINGLECPU) > + cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_SINGLECPU || > + cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_NONE) > break; > } > > @@ -1704,21 +1713,32 @@ static int k3_r5_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > * default to most common efuse configurations - Split-mode on AM64x > * and LockStep-mode on all others > */ > - cluster->mode = data->single_cpu_mode ? > + if (!data->is_single_core) > + cluster->mode = data->single_cpu_mode ? > CLUSTER_MODE_SPLIT : CLUSTER_MODE_LOCKSTEP; > + else > + cluster->mode = CLUSTER_MODE_NONE; > + > cluster->soc_data = data; > INIT_LIST_HEAD(&cluster->cores); > > - ret = of_property_read_u32(np, "ti,cluster-mode", &cluster->mode); > - if (ret < 0 && ret != -EINVAL) { > - dev_err(dev, "invalid format for ti,cluster-mode, ret = %d\n", > - ret); > - return ret; > + if (!data->is_single_core) { > + ret = of_property_read_u32(np, "ti,cluster-mode", &cluster->mode); > + if (ret < 0 && ret != -EINVAL) { > + dev_err(dev, "invalid format for ti,cluster-mode, ret = %d\n", ret); > + return ret; > + } > } > > num_cores = of_get_available_child_count(np); > - if (num_cores != 2) { > - dev_err(dev, "MCU cluster requires both R5F cores to be enabled, num_cores = %d\n", > + if (num_cores != 2 && !data->is_single_core) { > + dev_err(dev, "MCU cluster requires both R5F cores to be enabled but num_cores is set to = %d\n", > + num_cores); > + return -ENODEV; > + } > + > + if (num_cores != 1 && data->is_single_core) { > + dev_err(dev, "SoC supports only single core R5 but num_cores is set to %d\n", > num_cores); > return -ENODEV; > } > @@ -1760,18 +1780,28 @@ static const struct k3_r5_soc_data am65_j721e_soc_data = { > .tcm_is_double = false, > .tcm_ecc_autoinit = false, > .single_cpu_mode = false, > + .is_single_core = false, > }; > > static const struct k3_r5_soc_data j7200_j721s2_soc_data = { > .tcm_is_double = true, > .tcm_ecc_autoinit = true, > .single_cpu_mode = false, > + .is_single_core = false, > }; > > static const struct k3_r5_soc_data am64_soc_data = { > .tcm_is_double = true, > .tcm_ecc_autoinit = true, > .single_cpu_mode = true, > + .is_single_core = false, > +}; > + > +static const struct k3_r5_soc_data am62_soc_data = { > + .tcm_is_double = false, > + .tcm_ecc_autoinit = true, > + .single_cpu_mode = false, > + .is_single_core = true, > }; > > static const struct of_device_id k3_r5_of_match[] = { > @@ -1779,6 +1809,7 @@ static const struct of_device_id k3_r5_of_match[] = { > { .compatible = "ti,j721e-r5fss", .data = &am65_j721e_soc_data, }, > { .compatible = "ti,j7200-r5fss", .data = &j7200_j721s2_soc_data, }, > { .compatible = "ti,am64-r5fss", .data = &am64_soc_data, }, > + { .compatible = "ti,am62-r5fss", .data = &am62_soc_data, }, > { .compatible = "ti,j721s2-r5fss", .data = &j7200_j721s2_soc_data, }, > { /* sentinel */ }, > }; > -- > 2.17.1 >
Hi Tanmay, Thanks for the review and sorry for the delay. Please find my response inline. On 30/11/22 23:27, Tanmay Shah wrote: > Hi Devarsh, > > Please find my comments below. > > On 11/30/22 6:40 PM, Devarsh Thakkar wrote: >> >> >> AM62 and AM62A SoCs use single core R5F which is a new scenario >> different than the one being used with CLUSTER_MODE_SINGLECPU >> which is for utilizing a single core from a set of cores available >> in R5F cluster present in the SoC. >> >> To support this single core scenario map it with >> newly defined CLUSTER_MODE_NONE and use it when >> compatible is set to ti,am62-r5fss. >> >> Signed-off-by: Devarsh Thakkar <devarsht@ti.com> >> --- >> V2: Fix indentation and ordering issues as per review comments >> --- >> drivers/remoteproc/ti_k3_r5_remoteproc.c | 55 ++++++++++++++++++------ >> 1 file changed, 43 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/ti_k3_r5_remoteproc.c >> b/drivers/remoteproc/ti_k3_r5_remoteproc.c >> index 0481926c6975..9698b29a0b56 100644 >> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/ti_k3_r5_remoteproc.c >> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/ti_k3_r5_remoteproc.c >> @@ -74,11 +74,13 @@ struct k3_r5_mem { >> * Split mode : AM65x, J721E, J7200 and AM64x SoCs >> * LockStep mode : AM65x, J721E and J7200 SoCs >> * Single-CPU mode : AM64x SoCs only >> + * None : AM62x, AM62A SoCs >> */ >> enum cluster_mode { >> CLUSTER_MODE_SPLIT = 0, >> CLUSTER_MODE_LOCKSTEP, >> CLUSTER_MODE_SINGLECPU, >> + CLUSTER_MODE_NONE, >> }; >> >> /** >> @@ -86,11 +88,13 @@ enum cluster_mode { >> * @tcm_is_double: flag to denote the larger unified TCMs in certain >> modes >> * @tcm_ecc_autoinit: flag to denote the auto-initialization of TCMs >> for ECC >> * @single_cpu_mode: flag to denote if SoC/IP supports Single-CPU mode >> + * @is_single_core: flag to denote if SoC/IP has only single core R5 >> */ >> struct k3_r5_soc_data { >> bool tcm_is_double; >> bool tcm_ecc_autoinit; >> bool single_cpu_mode; >> + bool is_single_core; > > > If you are providing this data, then ignore parsing cluster-mode > property. This will make change very simple. Yes, I think we are doing the same thing here. AM62x is modeled as a cluster with a single core child but since it is single core there is no cluster mode applicable as such and hence no cluster-mode required to be set in device-tree for AM62x. > I believe this would save you any modification in bindings as well as > cluster-mode property is optional anyway. > > Also, "enum cluster_mode" reflects cluster-mode values from bindings > document except proper soc compatible. I don't see new value added in > bindings document i.e. only > > [0 -> split, 1 -> lockstep, 2 -> single cpu] are defined. If new enum is > introduced in driver, it is expected to reflect in bindings i.e. [3 -> > cluster-mode none] to avoid any confusion. To support backward compatibility we introduced CLUSTER_MODE_NONE at 3, but I think we can use -1 index and maybe another name say CLUSTER_MODE_INVALID to make it less confusing. The cluster-mode property doesn't apply to AM62x since it uses CLUSTER_MODE_INVALID, my understanding is we don't need to describe CLUSTER_MODE_INVALID in dt-binding since it will be only used internally by driver as -1 and need not be set at all in device-tree since for AM62x there won't be any cluster-mode property required to be set in the devicetree. > > I believe it is duplicate logic if you are providing "is_single_core" > information here and introduce CLUSTER_MODE_NONE as well. > > May be I am missing something, but I don't see any use of providing > extra value CLUSTER_MODE_NONE if "is_single_core" is set in the driver. > So, simple solutions is just to avoid parsing cluster-mode property if > is_single_core is set in the driver. Hope this helps. Fair point, we could have used soc data's is_single_core check instead of adding a new enum and used that check and that would have worked too. But in that case, cluster-mode by default would be set to 0 with as part of allocation of k3_r5_cluster struct during probe which would imply incorrectly CLUSTER_MODE_SPLIT for AM62x. I think it is better to have another enum say CLUSTER_MODE_INVALID and use it for SoC's like AM62x to make it less confusing. Regards, Devarsh > > > Thanks, > > Tanmay > > >> }; >> >> /** >> @@ -838,7 +842,8 @@ static int k3_r5_rproc_configure(struct >> k3_r5_rproc *kproc) >> >> core0 = list_first_entry(&cluster->cores, struct k3_r5_core, >> elem); >> if (cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_LOCKSTEP || >> - cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_SINGLECPU) { >> + cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_SINGLECPU || >> + cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_NONE) { >> core = core0; >> } else { >> core = kproc->core; >> @@ -853,7 +858,7 @@ static int k3_r5_rproc_configure(struct >> k3_r5_rproc *kproc) >> boot_vec, cfg, ctrl, stat); >> >> /* check if only Single-CPU mode is supported on applicable >> SoCs */ >> - if (cluster->soc_data->single_cpu_mode) { >> + if (cluster->soc_data->single_cpu_mode || >> cluster->soc_data->is_single_core) { >> single_cpu = >> !!(stat & >> PROC_BOOT_STATUS_FLAG_R5_SINGLECORE_ONLY); >> if (single_cpu && cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_SPLIT) { >> @@ -1074,6 +1079,7 @@ static void k3_r5_adjust_tcm_sizes(struct >> k3_r5_rproc *kproc) >> >> if (cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_LOCKSTEP || >> cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_SINGLECPU || >> + cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_NONE || >> !cluster->soc_data->tcm_is_double) >> return; >> >> @@ -1147,7 +1153,9 @@ static int k3_r5_rproc_configure_mode(struct >> k3_r5_rproc *kproc) >> atcm_enable = cfg & PROC_BOOT_CFG_FLAG_R5_ATCM_EN ? 1 : 0; >> btcm_enable = cfg & PROC_BOOT_CFG_FLAG_R5_BTCM_EN ? 1 : 0; >> loczrama = cfg & PROC_BOOT_CFG_FLAG_R5_TCM_RSTBASE ? 1 : 0; >> - if (cluster->soc_data->single_cpu_mode) { >> + if (cluster->soc_data->is_single_core) { >> + mode = CLUSTER_MODE_NONE; >> + } else if (cluster->soc_data->single_cpu_mode) { >> mode = cfg & PROC_BOOT_CFG_FLAG_R5_SINGLE_CORE ? >> CLUSTER_MODE_SINGLECPU : >> CLUSTER_MODE_SPLIT; >> } else { >> @@ -1271,7 +1279,8 @@ static int k3_r5_cluster_rproc_init(struct >> platform_device *pdev) >> >> /* create only one rproc in lockstep mode or >> single-cpu mode */ >> if (cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_LOCKSTEP || >> - cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_SINGLECPU) >> + cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_SINGLECPU || >> + cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_NONE) >> break; >> } >> >> @@ -1704,21 +1713,32 @@ static int k3_r5_probe(struct platform_device >> *pdev) >> * default to most common efuse configurations - Split-mode >> on AM64x >> * and LockStep-mode on all others >> */ >> - cluster->mode = data->single_cpu_mode ? >> + if (!data->is_single_core) >> + cluster->mode = data->single_cpu_mode ? >> CLUSTER_MODE_SPLIT : >> CLUSTER_MODE_LOCKSTEP; >> + else >> + cluster->mode = CLUSTER_MODE_NONE; >> + >> cluster->soc_data = data; >> INIT_LIST_HEAD(&cluster->cores); >> >> - ret = of_property_read_u32(np, "ti,cluster-mode", >> &cluster->mode); >> - if (ret < 0 && ret != -EINVAL) { >> - dev_err(dev, "invalid format for ti,cluster-mode, ret >> = %d\n", >> - ret); >> - return ret; >> + if (!data->is_single_core) { >> + ret = of_property_read_u32(np, "ti,cluster-mode", >> &cluster->mode); >> + if (ret < 0 && ret != -EINVAL) { >> + dev_err(dev, "invalid format for >> ti,cluster-mode, ret = %d\n", ret); >> + return ret; >> + } >> } >> >> num_cores = of_get_available_child_count(np); >> - if (num_cores != 2) { >> - dev_err(dev, "MCU cluster requires both R5F cores to >> be enabled, num_cores = %d\n", >> + if (num_cores != 2 && !data->is_single_core) { >> + dev_err(dev, "MCU cluster requires both R5F cores to >> be enabled but num_cores is set to = %d\n", >> + num_cores); >> + return -ENODEV; >> + } >> + >> + if (num_cores != 1 && data->is_single_core) { >> + dev_err(dev, "SoC supports only single core R5 but >> num_cores is set to %d\n", >> num_cores); >> return -ENODEV; >> } >> @@ -1760,18 +1780,28 @@ static const struct k3_r5_soc_data >> am65_j721e_soc_data = { >> .tcm_is_double = false, >> .tcm_ecc_autoinit = false, >> .single_cpu_mode = false, >> + .is_single_core = false, >> }; >> >> static const struct k3_r5_soc_data j7200_j721s2_soc_data = { >> .tcm_is_double = true, >> .tcm_ecc_autoinit = true, >> .single_cpu_mode = false, >> + .is_single_core = false, >> }; >> >> static const struct k3_r5_soc_data am64_soc_data = { >> .tcm_is_double = true, >> .tcm_ecc_autoinit = true, >> .single_cpu_mode = true, >> + .is_single_core = false, >> +}; >> + >> +static const struct k3_r5_soc_data am62_soc_data = { >> + .tcm_is_double = false, >> + .tcm_ecc_autoinit = true, >> + .single_cpu_mode = false, >> + .is_single_core = true, >> }; >> >> static const struct of_device_id k3_r5_of_match[] = { >> @@ -1779,6 +1809,7 @@ static const struct of_device_id >> k3_r5_of_match[] = { >> { .compatible = "ti,j721e-r5fss", .data = >> &am65_j721e_soc_data, }, >> { .compatible = "ti,j7200-r5fss", .data = >> &j7200_j721s2_soc_data, }, >> { .compatible = "ti,am64-r5fss", .data = &am64_soc_data, }, >> + { .compatible = "ti,am62-r5fss", .data = &am62_soc_data, }, >> { .compatible = "ti,j721s2-r5fss", .data = >> &j7200_j721s2_soc_data, }, >> { /* sentinel */ }, >> }; >> -- >> 2.17.1 >>
diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/ti_k3_r5_remoteproc.c b/drivers/remoteproc/ti_k3_r5_remoteproc.c index 0481926c6975..9698b29a0b56 100644 --- a/drivers/remoteproc/ti_k3_r5_remoteproc.c +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/ti_k3_r5_remoteproc.c @@ -74,11 +74,13 @@ struct k3_r5_mem { * Split mode : AM65x, J721E, J7200 and AM64x SoCs * LockStep mode : AM65x, J721E and J7200 SoCs * Single-CPU mode : AM64x SoCs only + * None : AM62x, AM62A SoCs */ enum cluster_mode { CLUSTER_MODE_SPLIT = 0, CLUSTER_MODE_LOCKSTEP, CLUSTER_MODE_SINGLECPU, + CLUSTER_MODE_NONE, }; /** @@ -86,11 +88,13 @@ enum cluster_mode { * @tcm_is_double: flag to denote the larger unified TCMs in certain modes * @tcm_ecc_autoinit: flag to denote the auto-initialization of TCMs for ECC * @single_cpu_mode: flag to denote if SoC/IP supports Single-CPU mode + * @is_single_core: flag to denote if SoC/IP has only single core R5 */ struct k3_r5_soc_data { bool tcm_is_double; bool tcm_ecc_autoinit; bool single_cpu_mode; + bool is_single_core; }; /** @@ -838,7 +842,8 @@ static int k3_r5_rproc_configure(struct k3_r5_rproc *kproc) core0 = list_first_entry(&cluster->cores, struct k3_r5_core, elem); if (cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_LOCKSTEP || - cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_SINGLECPU) { + cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_SINGLECPU || + cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_NONE) { core = core0; } else { core = kproc->core; @@ -853,7 +858,7 @@ static int k3_r5_rproc_configure(struct k3_r5_rproc *kproc) boot_vec, cfg, ctrl, stat); /* check if only Single-CPU mode is supported on applicable SoCs */ - if (cluster->soc_data->single_cpu_mode) { + if (cluster->soc_data->single_cpu_mode || cluster->soc_data->is_single_core) { single_cpu = !!(stat & PROC_BOOT_STATUS_FLAG_R5_SINGLECORE_ONLY); if (single_cpu && cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_SPLIT) { @@ -1074,6 +1079,7 @@ static void k3_r5_adjust_tcm_sizes(struct k3_r5_rproc *kproc) if (cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_LOCKSTEP || cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_SINGLECPU || + cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_NONE || !cluster->soc_data->tcm_is_double) return; @@ -1147,7 +1153,9 @@ static int k3_r5_rproc_configure_mode(struct k3_r5_rproc *kproc) atcm_enable = cfg & PROC_BOOT_CFG_FLAG_R5_ATCM_EN ? 1 : 0; btcm_enable = cfg & PROC_BOOT_CFG_FLAG_R5_BTCM_EN ? 1 : 0; loczrama = cfg & PROC_BOOT_CFG_FLAG_R5_TCM_RSTBASE ? 1 : 0; - if (cluster->soc_data->single_cpu_mode) { + if (cluster->soc_data->is_single_core) { + mode = CLUSTER_MODE_NONE; + } else if (cluster->soc_data->single_cpu_mode) { mode = cfg & PROC_BOOT_CFG_FLAG_R5_SINGLE_CORE ? CLUSTER_MODE_SINGLECPU : CLUSTER_MODE_SPLIT; } else { @@ -1271,7 +1279,8 @@ static int k3_r5_cluster_rproc_init(struct platform_device *pdev) /* create only one rproc in lockstep mode or single-cpu mode */ if (cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_LOCKSTEP || - cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_SINGLECPU) + cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_SINGLECPU || + cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_NONE) break; } @@ -1704,21 +1713,32 @@ static int k3_r5_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) * default to most common efuse configurations - Split-mode on AM64x * and LockStep-mode on all others */ - cluster->mode = data->single_cpu_mode ? + if (!data->is_single_core) + cluster->mode = data->single_cpu_mode ? CLUSTER_MODE_SPLIT : CLUSTER_MODE_LOCKSTEP; + else + cluster->mode = CLUSTER_MODE_NONE; + cluster->soc_data = data; INIT_LIST_HEAD(&cluster->cores); - ret = of_property_read_u32(np, "ti,cluster-mode", &cluster->mode); - if (ret < 0 && ret != -EINVAL) { - dev_err(dev, "invalid format for ti,cluster-mode, ret = %d\n", - ret); - return ret; + if (!data->is_single_core) { + ret = of_property_read_u32(np, "ti,cluster-mode", &cluster->mode); + if (ret < 0 && ret != -EINVAL) { + dev_err(dev, "invalid format for ti,cluster-mode, ret = %d\n", ret); + return ret; + } } num_cores = of_get_available_child_count(np); - if (num_cores != 2) { - dev_err(dev, "MCU cluster requires both R5F cores to be enabled, num_cores = %d\n", + if (num_cores != 2 && !data->is_single_core) { + dev_err(dev, "MCU cluster requires both R5F cores to be enabled but num_cores is set to = %d\n", + num_cores); + return -ENODEV; + } + + if (num_cores != 1 && data->is_single_core) { + dev_err(dev, "SoC supports only single core R5 but num_cores is set to %d\n", num_cores); return -ENODEV; } @@ -1760,18 +1780,28 @@ static const struct k3_r5_soc_data am65_j721e_soc_data = { .tcm_is_double = false, .tcm_ecc_autoinit = false, .single_cpu_mode = false, + .is_single_core = false, }; static const struct k3_r5_soc_data j7200_j721s2_soc_data = { .tcm_is_double = true, .tcm_ecc_autoinit = true, .single_cpu_mode = false, + .is_single_core = false, }; static const struct k3_r5_soc_data am64_soc_data = { .tcm_is_double = true, .tcm_ecc_autoinit = true, .single_cpu_mode = true, + .is_single_core = false, +}; + +static const struct k3_r5_soc_data am62_soc_data = { + .tcm_is_double = false, + .tcm_ecc_autoinit = true, + .single_cpu_mode = false, + .is_single_core = true, }; static const struct of_device_id k3_r5_of_match[] = { @@ -1779,6 +1809,7 @@ static const struct of_device_id k3_r5_of_match[] = { { .compatible = "ti,j721e-r5fss", .data = &am65_j721e_soc_data, }, { .compatible = "ti,j7200-r5fss", .data = &j7200_j721s2_soc_data, }, { .compatible = "ti,am64-r5fss", .data = &am64_soc_data, }, + { .compatible = "ti,am62-r5fss", .data = &am62_soc_data, }, { .compatible = "ti,j721s2-r5fss", .data = &j7200_j721s2_soc_data, }, { /* sentinel */ }, };
AM62 and AM62A SoCs use single core R5F which is a new scenario different than the one being used with CLUSTER_MODE_SINGLECPU which is for utilizing a single core from a set of cores available in R5F cluster present in the SoC. To support this single core scenario map it with newly defined CLUSTER_MODE_NONE and use it when compatible is set to ti,am62-r5fss. Signed-off-by: Devarsh Thakkar <devarsht@ti.com> --- V2: Fix indentation and ordering issues as per review comments --- drivers/remoteproc/ti_k3_r5_remoteproc.c | 55 ++++++++++++++++++------ 1 file changed, 43 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)