From: Peng Fan <[email protected]>
V5:
Rename RPROC_FEAT_ATTACH_RECOVERY to RPROC_FEAT_ATTACH_ON_RECOVERY
Add kerneldoc for rproc features
Change rproc_set_feature to return int type and add a max feature check
Use __rproc_detach and __rproc_attach when do attach recovery
V4:
Based on Bjorn's comments on V2-2
Move the rproc_has_feature/rproc_set_feature to remoteproc_internal.h and
Keep rproc_features still in remoteproc.h, because we use
RPROC_MAX_FEATURES to declare bitmap.
Update commit log for patch 2/2, and add comments
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-remoteproc/cover/[email protected]/
V3:
Resend the wrong labeled patchset
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-remoteproc/list/?series=621311
Write a cover-letter
To i.MX8QM/QXP, they have a M4 core self-recovery capability without
Linux loading firmware. The self recovery is done by
SCU(System Control Unit). Current remoteproc framework only support Linux
help recovery remote processor(stop, loading firmware, start). This
patchset is support remote processor self recovery(attach recovery).
In order to avoid introducing a new variable(bool support_self_recovery),
patch 1 introduce a new function, rproc_has_feature to make code easy to
extend, cleaner, such as we could move "bool has_iommu" to
rproc_has_feature(rproc, RPROC_FEAT_IOMMU).
Patch 2 is introduce a new function rproc_attach_recovery for
self recovery, the original logic move to rproc_firmware_recovery meaning
needs linux to help recovery.
V2-version 2:
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-remoteproc/list/?series=621311
Introduce rproc_has_feature
V2-version 1:
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-remoteproc/patch/[email protected]/
Nothing change in V2.
Only move this patch out from
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-remoteproc/list/?series=604364
Peng Fan (2):
remoteproc: introduce rproc features
remoteproc: support attach recovery after rproc crash
drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c | 64 +++++++++++++++++-------
drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_internal.h | 15 ++++++
include/linux/remoteproc.h | 15 ++++++
3 files changed, 75 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
--
2.25.1
From: Peng Fan <[email protected]>
Current logic only support main processor to stop/start the remote
processor after rproc crash. However to SoC, such as i.MX8QM/QXP, the
remote processor could do attach recovery after crash and trigger watchdog
reboot. It does not need main processor to load image, or stop/start M4
core.
Introduce two functions: rproc_attach_recovery, rproc_firmware_recovery
for the two cases. Firmware recovery is as before, let main processor to
help recovery, while attach recovery is recover itself withou help.
To attach recovery, we only do detach and attach.
Signed-off-by: Peng Fan <[email protected]>
---
drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c | 64 +++++++++++++++++++---------
1 file changed, 45 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
index 02a04ab34a23..1c1c90176aff 100644
--- a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
+++ b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
@@ -1883,6 +1883,47 @@ static int __rproc_detach(struct rproc *rproc)
return 0;
}
+static int rproc_attach_recovery(struct rproc *rproc)
+{
+ int ret;
+
+ mutex_unlock(&rproc->lock);
+ ret = __rproc_detach(rproc);
+ mutex_lock(&rproc->lock);
+ if (ret)
+ return ret;
+
+ return __rproc_attach(rproc);
+}
+
+static int rproc_firmware_recovery(struct rproc *rproc)
+{
+ const struct firmware *firmware_p;
+ struct device *dev = &rproc->dev;
+ int ret;
+
+ ret = rproc_stop(rproc, true);
+ if (ret)
+ return ret;
+
+ /* generate coredump */
+ rproc->ops->coredump(rproc);
+
+ /* load firmware */
+ ret = request_firmware(&firmware_p, rproc->firmware, dev);
+ if (ret < 0) {
+ dev_err(dev, "request_firmware failed: %d\n", ret);
+ return ret;
+ }
+
+ /* boot the remote processor up again */
+ ret = rproc_start(rproc, firmware_p);
+
+ release_firmware(firmware_p);
+
+ return ret;
+}
+
/**
* rproc_trigger_recovery() - recover a remoteproc
* @rproc: the remote processor
@@ -1897,7 +1938,6 @@ static int __rproc_detach(struct rproc *rproc)
*/
int rproc_trigger_recovery(struct rproc *rproc)
{
- const struct firmware *firmware_p;
struct device *dev = &rproc->dev;
int ret;
@@ -1911,24 +1951,10 @@ int rproc_trigger_recovery(struct rproc *rproc)
dev_err(dev, "recovering %s\n", rproc->name);
- ret = rproc_stop(rproc, true);
- if (ret)
- goto unlock_mutex;
-
- /* generate coredump */
- rproc->ops->coredump(rproc);
-
- /* load firmware */
- ret = request_firmware(&firmware_p, rproc->firmware, dev);
- if (ret < 0) {
- dev_err(dev, "request_firmware failed: %d\n", ret);
- goto unlock_mutex;
- }
-
- /* boot the remote processor up again */
- ret = rproc_start(rproc, firmware_p);
-
- release_firmware(firmware_p);
+ if (rproc_has_feature(rproc, RPROC_FEAT_ATTACH_ON_RECOVERY))
+ ret = rproc_attach_recovery(rproc);
+ else
+ ret = rproc_firmware_recovery(rproc);
unlock_mutex:
mutex_unlock(&rproc->lock);
--
2.25.1
On Wed, Jun 15, 2022 at 11:20:48AM +0800, Peng Fan (OSS) wrote:
> From: Peng Fan <[email protected]>
>
> Current logic only support main processor to stop/start the remote
> processor after rproc crash. However to SoC, such as i.MX8QM/QXP, the
> remote processor could do attach recovery after crash and trigger watchdog
> reboot. It does not need main processor to load image, or stop/start M4
> core.
>
> Introduce two functions: rproc_attach_recovery, rproc_firmware_recovery
> for the two cases. Firmware recovery is as before, let main processor to
> help recovery, while attach recovery is recover itself withou help.
> To attach recovery, we only do detach and attach.
>
> Signed-off-by: Peng Fan <[email protected]>
> ---
> drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c | 64 +++++++++++++++++++---------
> 1 file changed, 45 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> index 02a04ab34a23..1c1c90176aff 100644
> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> @@ -1883,6 +1883,47 @@ static int __rproc_detach(struct rproc *rproc)
> return 0;
> }
>
> +static int rproc_attach_recovery(struct rproc *rproc)
> +{
> + int ret;
> +
> + mutex_unlock(&rproc->lock);
> + ret = __rproc_detach(rproc);
> + mutex_lock(&rproc->lock);
> + if (ret)
> + return ret;
> +
> + return __rproc_attach(rproc);
> +}
> +
> +static int rproc_firmware_recovery(struct rproc *rproc)
s/rproc_firmware_recovery/rproc_boot_recovery
> +{
> + const struct firmware *firmware_p;
> + struct device *dev = &rproc->dev;
> + int ret;
> +
> + ret = rproc_stop(rproc, true);
> + if (ret)
> + return ret;
> +
> + /* generate coredump */
> + rproc->ops->coredump(rproc);
> +
> + /* load firmware */
> + ret = request_firmware(&firmware_p, rproc->firmware, dev);
> + if (ret < 0) {
> + dev_err(dev, "request_firmware failed: %d\n", ret);
> + return ret;
> + }
> +
> + /* boot the remote processor up again */
> + ret = rproc_start(rproc, firmware_p);
> +
> + release_firmware(firmware_p);
> +
> + return ret;
> +}
> +
> /**
> * rproc_trigger_recovery() - recover a remoteproc
> * @rproc: the remote processor
> @@ -1897,7 +1938,6 @@ static int __rproc_detach(struct rproc *rproc)
> */
> int rproc_trigger_recovery(struct rproc *rproc)
> {
> - const struct firmware *firmware_p;
> struct device *dev = &rproc->dev;
> int ret;
>
> @@ -1911,24 +1951,10 @@ int rproc_trigger_recovery(struct rproc *rproc)
>
> dev_err(dev, "recovering %s\n", rproc->name);
>
> - ret = rproc_stop(rproc, true);
> - if (ret)
> - goto unlock_mutex;
> -
> - /* generate coredump */
> - rproc->ops->coredump(rproc);
> -
> - /* load firmware */
> - ret = request_firmware(&firmware_p, rproc->firmware, dev);
> - if (ret < 0) {
> - dev_err(dev, "request_firmware failed: %d\n", ret);
> - goto unlock_mutex;
> - }
> -
> - /* boot the remote processor up again */
> - ret = rproc_start(rproc, firmware_p);
> -
> - release_firmware(firmware_p);
> + if (rproc_has_feature(rproc, RPROC_FEAT_ATTACH_ON_RECOVERY))
> + ret = rproc_attach_recovery(rproc);
> + else
> + ret = rproc_firmware_recovery(rproc);
This patch contains a serious flaw related to locking that should have been
obvious when it was put together. Please go back and carefully review the code you are submitting.
I will not consider another revision of this set until July 15th.
Thanks,
Mathieu
>
> unlock_mutex:
> mutex_unlock(&rproc->lock);
> --
> 2.25.1
>
Hi Mathieu,
> Subject: Re: [PATCH V5 2/2] remoteproc: support attach recovery after rproc
> crash
>
> On Wed, Jun 15, 2022 at 11:20:48AM +0800, Peng Fan (OSS) wrote:
> > From: Peng Fan <[email protected]>
> >
> > Current logic only support main processor to stop/start the remote
> > processor after rproc crash. However to SoC, such as i.MX8QM/QXP, the
> > remote processor could do attach recovery after crash and trigger
> > watchdog reboot. It does not need main processor to load image, or
> > stop/start M4 core.
> >
> > Introduce two functions: rproc_attach_recovery,
> > rproc_firmware_recovery for the two cases. Firmware recovery is as
> > before, let main processor to help recovery, while attach recovery is recover
> itself withou help.
> > To attach recovery, we only do detach and attach.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Peng Fan <[email protected]>
> > ---
> > drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c | 64
> > +++++++++++++++++++---------
> > 1 file changed, 45 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> > b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> > index 02a04ab34a23..1c1c90176aff 100644
> > --- a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> > +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> > @@ -1883,6 +1883,47 @@ static int __rproc_detach(struct rproc *rproc)
> > return 0;
> > }
> >
> > +static int rproc_attach_recovery(struct rproc *rproc) {
> > + int ret;
> > +
> > + mutex_unlock(&rproc->lock);
> > + ret = __rproc_detach(rproc);
> > + mutex_lock(&rproc->lock);
> > + if (ret)
> > + return ret;
> > +
> > + return __rproc_attach(rproc);
> > +}
> > +
> > +static int rproc_firmware_recovery(struct rproc *rproc)
>
> s/rproc_firmware_recovery/rproc_boot_recovery
>
> > +{
> > + const struct firmware *firmware_p;
> > + struct device *dev = &rproc->dev;
> > + int ret;
> > +
> > + ret = rproc_stop(rproc, true);
> > + if (ret)
> > + return ret;
> > +
> > + /* generate coredump */
> > + rproc->ops->coredump(rproc);
> > +
> > + /* load firmware */
> > + ret = request_firmware(&firmware_p, rproc->firmware, dev);
> > + if (ret < 0) {
> > + dev_err(dev, "request_firmware failed: %d\n", ret);
> > + return ret;
> > + }
> > +
> > + /* boot the remote processor up again */
> > + ret = rproc_start(rproc, firmware_p);
> > +
> > + release_firmware(firmware_p);
> > +
> > + return ret;
> > +}
> > +
> > /**
> > * rproc_trigger_recovery() - recover a remoteproc
> > * @rproc: the remote processor
> > @@ -1897,7 +1938,6 @@ static int __rproc_detach(struct rproc *rproc)
> > */
> > int rproc_trigger_recovery(struct rproc *rproc) {
> > - const struct firmware *firmware_p;
> > struct device *dev = &rproc->dev;
> > int ret;
> >
> > @@ -1911,24 +1951,10 @@ int rproc_trigger_recovery(struct rproc
> > *rproc)
> >
> > dev_err(dev, "recovering %s\n", rproc->name);
> >
> > - ret = rproc_stop(rproc, true);
> > - if (ret)
> > - goto unlock_mutex;
> > -
> > - /* generate coredump */
> > - rproc->ops->coredump(rproc);
> > -
> > - /* load firmware */
> > - ret = request_firmware(&firmware_p, rproc->firmware, dev);
> > - if (ret < 0) {
> > - dev_err(dev, "request_firmware failed: %d\n", ret);
> > - goto unlock_mutex;
> > - }
> > -
> > - /* boot the remote processor up again */
> > - ret = rproc_start(rproc, firmware_p);
> > -
> > - release_firmware(firmware_p);
> > + if (rproc_has_feature(rproc, RPROC_FEAT_ATTACH_ON_RECOVERY))
> > + ret = rproc_attach_recovery(rproc);
> > + else
> > + ret = rproc_firmware_recovery(rproc);
>
> This patch contains a serious flaw related to locking that should have been
> obvious when it was put together. Please go back and carefully review the
> code you are submitting.
I think you mean the following change? In v4, I use rproc_detach, but
I missed to drop the unlock and lock when changing to use __rproc_detach
based on your comments in V4. My bad.
+static int rproc_attach_recovery(struct rproc *rproc)
+{
+ int ret;
+
+ mutex_unlock(&rproc->lock);
+ ret = __rproc_detach(rproc);
+ mutex_lock(&rproc->lock);
+ if (ret)
+ return ret;
+
+ return __rproc_attach(rproc);
+}
I will drop the unlock and lock as below.
static int rproc_attach_recovery(struct rproc *rproc)
{
int ret;
ret = __rproc_detach(rproc);
if (ret)
return ret;
return __rproc_attach(rproc);
}
>
> I will not consider another revision of this set until July 15th.
No problem. Hope until then, my v6 patch would not be just
enter into your queue and be the end one :)
Thanks,
Peng.
>
> Thanks,
> Mathieu
>
> >
> > unlock_mutex:
> > mutex_unlock(&rproc->lock);
> > --
> > 2.25.1
> >