Received: by 2002:a25:31c3:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id x186csp1401989ybx; Thu, 7 Nov 2019 11:23:18 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqyPYY8UXOSwqnHn2GaW3TWyFWyOT8jz3mGYf0Xq4pNWwq6M3U9Sx4rx6cpLhDWIZnC+dloP X-Received: by 2002:a05:6402:1156:: with SMTP id g22mr5574417edw.233.1573154598402; Thu, 07 Nov 2019 11:23:18 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1573154598; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=VydMpCSpF50q78OLzgQm2sxcQ5fnO1HbIsIDheS9g8QDD7ndrIcBEC5quiokCz5akL vgk99SV3bHTUtB+1nNqQAKNZuPhmjlou1g6TZYEIiUyFwUz2EtM3ATPXuMb8RRbt6rMm AbvKdz3Q+I9fthwHYACNHcyFzmKp1eGJ4hQTdUiCczlpXtyyLhe4qbKS7OKuoCvQCaMK UALqw76TiVBlLYtj99Oqs+GV8E8ED7XbA5eJa0nOfR4sSIWSIW+R2+EXiiNEdpTqhKZN VIDhLfCBRF532Kk8hzibRUsxrwFeIFMBzCoyHj14pJmZL3Q/EGdxemiL3szpttqICrSd HySA== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:user-agent:in-reply-to :content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc :to:from:date:dkim-signature; bh=R0mhpIm1j25C2kw80c9DHmkkE8Y3evymZD3gEVrQAkg=; b=FdXsH9/7gYViEgfY8i/8zn997HfpwniT/EINtb0NZAs3ENURUTiYOTslduaEd7pTPN gzFOAOGuzTEIQha76Djcv0icy2AIBsvYfntbn9OB6hwir1KVmE/au/63zLicUyxGXTJ9 V/MzCD2J3nAEzRNgJDCSEAVETSKX9eMZ9pOzMPgGLVMQigpAfLzpV7njdoq4s92QDCd5 hvd7A+ILPfGkVs5wDmNalcFT8TVX9entqJSjz+CGR0Gm2XNa7t+mQuYUcleg5QQpMxKY hxHKpz2vgOtH7SaQ1sAJvK+FqSr8XNw/rNHW5OOtNNs/mVQW+SwISrxE6Y4zEs1Pt8Pc BJ+g== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@linaro.org header.s=google header.b="z7E4cVp/"; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=linaro.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id q14si2104874eju.84.2019.11.07.11.22.54; Thu, 07 Nov 2019 11:23:18 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@linaro.org header.s=google header.b="z7E4cVp/"; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=linaro.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726888AbfKGTSv (ORCPT + 99 others); Thu, 7 Nov 2019 14:18:51 -0500 Received: from mail-pl1-f195.google.com ([209.85.214.195]:41973 "EHLO mail-pl1-f195.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725851AbfKGTSv (ORCPT ); Thu, 7 Nov 2019 14:18:51 -0500 Received: by mail-pl1-f195.google.com with SMTP id d29so2181310plj.8 for ; Thu, 07 Nov 2019 11:18:50 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linaro.org; s=google; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=R0mhpIm1j25C2kw80c9DHmkkE8Y3evymZD3gEVrQAkg=; b=z7E4cVp/HfrOA+qGSQdCZ/PiQcee5McJBxFzRama+hH6/8ueZCeNSNuEz7SBRwJ234 XyAFns5qi15Ir0lFWxcW8l5km8vP4x4Fuhd48lPh9/5M77mOziUmpraNJrxa9mcIDpqP BLGXC5rRidq6+kv7KCtEXwKdhGH7ciTPV+NZGOGMlXb6cTCW186VmsoQFM83nUWeyb4D bi3DQJcL8o/WIXNHe7c2Z09BKNpdlU8PB0fm+bbOiuwgiPwv3FQeop3b6FBR/SAVqEm5 RmlcIWLqToe4I07UwcE5QTqiEgLnUOXz2F3iSOuOJwIDNrYOlbJ94HY11m/dzov8gVRD bm8A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=R0mhpIm1j25C2kw80c9DHmkkE8Y3evymZD3gEVrQAkg=; b=R2+aLLUNecq6ZRvozx7EvAc997tr1nQSZd4MX9AMUiKmIgJh6TqbPBSbBlanS7F8QV v+g7jMvHL1p+pG51nsTwFKniGeZKPhNxUgUAXSXZJhuimvZP4oL1NmOuxVc4qyMLKimE aFxWMiII6SDpEc/0Sp3zmB0eihB3x9+6W/vb2dva6veg1c1b9s5M62MIQjLHhNmIqTZP G778RUDmjBZQz319cEUriRzc4KKLn1izLURPZ43zhjzOC19X8Uw0P6rb+XDsalF9qrwf QIk1RGlmvFTrR4gDJ5KbqT6jtclUcX0B6fOLeT0hk69Fg1dUgfs24BZuhM1Pwzn/PUN8 bxkA== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAWuGhliOohazmnJ/M/N98yRVHvqL2GFYHQ+FSHVyJNqJ9FAuiDe okBL5+kq6QuQGNI0+ID6iqUG2lYcjTM= X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:8a8b:: with SMTP id p11mr5547042plo.152.1573154329932; Thu, 07 Nov 2019 11:18:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from builder (104-188-17-28.lightspeed.sndgca.sbcglobal.net. [104.188.17.28]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id m67sm2920759pje.32.2019.11.07.11.18.48 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 07 Nov 2019 11:18:48 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 7 Nov 2019 11:18:46 -0800 From: Bjorn Andersson To: Elliot Berman Cc: saiprakash.ranjan@codeaurora.org, agross@kernel.org, tsoni@codeaurora.org, sidgup@codeaurora.org, psodagud@codeaurora.org, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 09/17] firmware: qcom_scm-64: Improve SMC convention detection Message-ID: <20191107191846.GA3907604@builder> References: <1572917256-24205-1-git-send-email-eberman@codeaurora.org> <1572917256-24205-10-git-send-email-eberman@codeaurora.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1572917256-24205-10-git-send-email-eberman@codeaurora.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.12.2 (2019-09-21) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon 04 Nov 17:27 PST 2019, Elliot Berman wrote: > - Use enum to describe SMC convention. > - Improve SMC convention detection to use __qcom_scm_is_call_available > instead of circumventing qcom_scm_call_smccc. > - Improve SMC convention detection to check that SMCCC-32 works, instead > of just assuming it does of SMCCC-64 does not. I was about to tell you that your list represent individual changes, but I think you should rewrite the commit message instead. Something like: """ Improve the calling convention detection to use __qcom_scm_is_call_available() and not blindly assume 32-bit mode if the checks fails. """ > > Signed-off-by: Elliot Berman > --- > drivers/firmware/qcom_scm-64.c | 42 ++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------ > 1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/firmware/qcom_scm-64.c b/drivers/firmware/qcom_scm-64.c > index f79b0dc..2579246 100644 > --- a/drivers/firmware/qcom_scm-64.c > +++ b/drivers/firmware/qcom_scm-64.c > @@ -58,7 +58,13 @@ struct arm_smccc_args { > unsigned long a[8]; > }; > > -static u64 qcom_smccc_convention = -1; > +enum qcom_smc_convention { > + SMC_CONVENTION_UNKNOWN, > + SMC_CONVENTION_ARM_32, > + SMC_CONVENTION_ARM_64, > +}; > + > +static enum qcom_smc_convention qcom_smc_convention = SMC_CONVENTION_UNKNOWN; > static DEFINE_MUTEX(qcom_scm_lock); > > #define QCOM_SCM_EBUSY_WAIT_MS 30 > @@ -103,7 +109,9 @@ static int ___qcom_scm_call_smccc(struct device *dev, > > smc.a[0] = ARM_SMCCC_CALL_VAL( > atomic ? ARM_SMCCC_FAST_CALL : ARM_SMCCC_STD_CALL, > - qcom_smccc_convention, Use a local variable instead of using a ternary operator in the middle of the arguments. > + (qcom_smc_convention == SMC_CONVENTION_ARM_64) ? > + ARM_SMCCC_SMC_64 : > + ARM_SMCCC_SMC_32, Here SMC_CONVENTION_UNKNOWN would mean ARM_SMCCC_SMC_32... > desc->owner, > SMCCC_FUNCNUM(desc->svc, desc->cmd)); > smc.a[1] = desc->arginfo; > @@ -117,7 +125,7 @@ static int ___qcom_scm_call_smccc(struct device *dev, > if (!args_virt) > return -ENOMEM; > > - if (qcom_smccc_convention == ARM_SMCCC_SMC_32) { > + if (qcom_smc_convention == SMC_CONVENTION_ARM_32) { ...but here it would mean ARM_SMCCC_SMC_64. > __le32 *args = args_virt; > > for (i = 0; i < SMCCC_N_EXT_ARGS; i++) > @@ -583,19 +591,17 @@ int __qcom_scm_qsmmu500_wait_safe_toggle(struct device *dev, bool en) > > void __qcom_scm_init(void) > { > - u64 cmd; > - struct arm_smccc_res res; > - u32 function = SMCCC_FUNCNUM(QCOM_SCM_SVC_INFO, QCOM_SCM_INFO_IS_CALL_AVAIL); > - > - /* First try a SMC64 call */ > - cmd = ARM_SMCCC_CALL_VAL(ARM_SMCCC_FAST_CALL, ARM_SMCCC_SMC_64, > - ARM_SMCCC_OWNER_SIP, function); > - > - arm_smccc_smc(cmd, QCOM_SCM_ARGS(1), cmd & (~BIT(ARM_SMCCC_TYPE_SHIFT)), > - 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, &res); > - > - if (!res.a0 && res.a1) > - qcom_smccc_convention = ARM_SMCCC_SMC_64; > - else > - qcom_smccc_convention = ARM_SMCCC_SMC_32; > + qcom_smc_convention = SMC_CONVENTION_ARM_64; > + if (__qcom_scm_is_call_available(NULL, QCOM_SCM_SVC_INFO, > + QCOM_SCM_INFO_IS_CALL_AVAIL) == 1) > + goto out; > + > + qcom_smc_convention = SMC_CONVENTION_ARM_32; > + if (__qcom_scm_is_call_available(NULL, QCOM_SCM_SVC_INFO, > + QCOM_SCM_INFO_IS_CALL_AVAIL) == 1) > + goto out; > + > + qcom_smc_convention = SMC_CONVENTION_UNKNOWN; If above two tests can be considered reliable I would suggest that you fail hard here instead. And if so I think you should postpone the introduction of the enum until you actually need it to represent the legacy mode. Regards, Bjorn > +out: > + pr_debug("QCOM SCM SMC Convention: %d\n", qcom_smc_convention); > } > -- > The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum, > a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project >