Add support for PIL loading of WPSS co-processor for SC7280 SOCs.
Changes from v4/v5:
- Add yaml conversion for adsp/cdsp dt-bindings
- Change clock names in wpss dt-bindings
- Correct mistake in signed-off enail ID
Rakesh Pillai (3):
dt-bindings: remoteproc: qcom: adsp: Convert binding to YAML
dt-bindings: remoteproc: qcom: Add SC7280 WPSS support
remoteproc: qcom: q6v5_wpss: Add support for sc7280 WPSS
.../bindings/remoteproc/qcom,hexagon-v56.txt | 140 --------------
.../bindings/remoteproc/qcom,qcs404-cdsp-pil.yaml | 167 ++++++++++++++++
.../bindings/remoteproc/qcom,sc7280-wpss-pil.yaml | 196 +++++++++++++++++++
.../bindings/remoteproc/qcom,sdm845-adsp-pil.yaml | 160 ++++++++++++++++
drivers/remoteproc/qcom_q6v5_adsp.c | 209 +++++++++++++++++++--
5 files changed, 717 insertions(+), 155 deletions(-)
delete mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/qcom,hexagon-v56.txt
create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/qcom,qcs404-cdsp-pil.yaml
create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/qcom,sc7280-wpss-pil.yaml
create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/qcom,sdm845-adsp-pil.yaml
--
2.7.4
Quoting Rakesh Pillai (2021-10-03 23:48:50)
> Add support for PIL loading of WPSS co-processor for SC7280 SOCs.
>
> Changes from v4/v5:
> - Add yaml conversion for adsp/cdsp dt-bindings
> - Change clock names in wpss dt-bindings
> - Correct mistake in signed-off enail ID
Can you keep a running tally here of the full progression of the series?
That helps to look back and make sure we don't make a comment that has
already been made before.
One more request. Can you add support for 'firmware-name' like there is
in Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/qcom,q6v5.txt so that we
can install firmware into some namespaced/versioned place instead of
having to put wpss files into /lib/firmware? It would also be nice to
load a single firmware file instead of having to split the file into
many pieces.
>
> Rakesh Pillai (3):
> dt-bindings: remoteproc: qcom: adsp: Convert binding to YAML
> dt-bindings: remoteproc: qcom: Add SC7280 WPSS support
> remoteproc: qcom: q6v5_wpss: Add support for sc7280 WPSS
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stephen Boyd <[email protected]>
> Sent: Friday, October 8, 2021 12:05 AM
> To: Rakesh Pillai <[email protected]>; [email protected];
> [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected];
> [email protected]; [email protected]
> Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; linux-
> [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected];
> [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 0/3] Add support for sc7280 WPSS PIL loading
>
> Quoting Rakesh Pillai (2021-10-03 23:48:50)
> > Add support for PIL loading of WPSS co-processor for SC7280 SOCs.
> >
> > Changes from v4/v5:
> > - Add yaml conversion for adsp/cdsp dt-bindings
> > - Change clock names in wpss dt-bindings
> > - Correct mistake in signed-off enail ID
>
> Can you keep a running tally here of the full progression of the series?
> That helps to look back and make sure we don't make a comment that has
> already been made before.
>
> One more request. Can you add support for 'firmware-name' like there is in
> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/qcom,q6v5.txt so that we
> can install firmware into some namespaced/versioned place instead of
> having to put wpss files into /lib/firmware?
Hi Stephen,
I have posted v7 with the support for firmware-name to be provided in the DT entry.
> It would also be nice to load a
> single firmware file instead of having to split the file into many pieces.
This would require lot of changes and lot of code duplication from request firmware.
Also the base ath11k firmware files have been posted as split files.
Thanks,
Rakesh Pillai
Quoting [email protected] (2021-10-28 06:08:39)
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Stephen Boyd <[email protected]>
> > Sent: Friday, October 8, 2021 12:05 AM
> > To: Rakesh Pillai <[email protected]>; [email protected];
> > [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected];
> > [email protected]; [email protected]
> > Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; linux-
> > [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected];
> > [email protected]
> > Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 0/3] Add support for sc7280 WPSS PIL loading
> >
> > Quoting Rakesh Pillai (2021-10-03 23:48:50)
> > > Add support for PIL loading of WPSS co-processor for SC7280 SOCs.
> > >
> > > Changes from v4/v5:
> > > - Add yaml conversion for adsp/cdsp dt-bindings
> > > - Change clock names in wpss dt-bindings
> > > - Correct mistake in signed-off enail ID
> >
> > Can you keep a running tally here of the full progression of the series?
> > That helps to look back and make sure we don't make a comment that has
> > already been made before.
> >
> > One more request. Can you add support for 'firmware-name' like there is in
> > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/qcom,q6v5.txt so that we
> > can install firmware into some namespaced/versioned place instead of
> > having to put wpss files into /lib/firmware?
>
> Hi Stephen,
> I have posted v7 with the support for firmware-name to be provided in the DT entry.
Thanks. I didn't see it in my inbox. No Cc for me?
>
> > It would also be nice to load a
> > single firmware file instead of having to split the file into many pieces.
>
> This would require lot of changes and lot of code duplication from request firmware.
> Also the base ath11k firmware files have been posted as split files.
>
Other firmwares have done it so it seems technically possible. So
nothing is preventing it?
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stephen Boyd <[email protected]>
> Sent: Friday, October 29, 2021 3:32 AM
> To: [email protected]; [email protected];
> [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected];
> [email protected]; [email protected]
> Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; linux-
> [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected];
> [email protected]
> Subject: RE: [PATCH v6 0/3] Add support for sc7280 WPSS PIL loading
>
> Quoting [email protected] (2021-10-28 06:08:39)
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Stephen Boyd <[email protected]>
> > > Sent: Friday, October 8, 2021 12:05 AM
> > > To: Rakesh Pillai <[email protected]>; [email protected];
> > > [email protected]; [email protected];
> > > [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]
> > > Cc: [email protected]; [email protected];
> > > linux- [email protected]; [email protected];
> > > [email protected]; [email protected]
> > > Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 0/3] Add support for sc7280 WPSS PIL loading
> > >
> > > Quoting Rakesh Pillai (2021-10-03 23:48:50)
> > > > Add support for PIL loading of WPSS co-processor for SC7280 SOCs.
> > > >
> > > > Changes from v4/v5:
> > > > - Add yaml conversion for adsp/cdsp dt-bindings
> > > > - Change clock names in wpss dt-bindings
> > > > - Correct mistake in signed-off enail ID
> > >
> > > Can you keep a running tally here of the full progression of the series?
> > > That helps to look back and make sure we don't make a comment that
> > > has already been made before.
> > >
> > > One more request. Can you add support for 'firmware-name' like there
> > > is in Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/qcom,q6v5.txt so
> > > that we can install firmware into some namespaced/versioned place
> > > instead of having to put wpss files into /lib/firmware?
> >
> > Hi Stephen,
> > I have posted v7 with the support for firmware-name to be provided in the
> DT entry.
>
> Thanks. I didn't see it in my inbox. No Cc for me?
>
> >
> > > It would also be nice to load a
> > > single firmware file instead of having to split the file into many pieces.
> >
> > This would require lot of changes and lot of code duplication from request
> firmware.
> > Also the base ath11k firmware files have been posted as split files.
> >
>
> Other firmwares have done it so it seems technically possible. So nothing is
> preventing it?
Yes it should be possible.
I can probably add that support and post it as a different patch series, so as to
not club it with the current patch series. Does that sound okay ?
Thanks,
Rakesh Pillai.
Quoting [email protected] (2021-10-28 23:21:49)
> >
> > Other firmwares have done it so it seems technically possible. So nothing is
> > preventing it?
>
> Yes it should be possible.
> I can probably add that support and post it as a different patch series, so as to
> not club it with the current patch series. Does that sound okay ?
>
Yes