Received: by 2002:a25:23cc:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id j195csp1323557ybj; Tue, 5 May 2020 18:06:01 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APiQypL7jM3+gW4g6zEY61/eSDR3l9QG7SnEeMgS28PCYfe+Cs6be90gyqpYs62we/hnQVOwvAaV X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:f295:: with SMTP id gu21mr5368084ejb.83.1588727161253; Tue, 05 May 2020 18:06:01 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1588727161; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=FYXagxCGeEY0ycB2QQotfKwam9emCYkZFuf1XmCopXWzmDOCPj4JDQv8gDRUCH+P4K p/6/HpAXUeyisEA7hirK2FRHqHWX4xhrp4RWPgg10HfEEr0EkrGdTpfCe19NJfd3FiW+ YmP6YctrH1Co80JmbUeHqdY3NoXhe88D2ziAJE496HT0zK9794rPgUbk5u8dWpxh2QPO 9geMWcVI8KgmCa1TM6qXHtuknkhG1OfzP9vkon23X5ajCdsdoiIaqmWK24BvZnUIBNua PcSBq5Lacpl80QMN5v66ejZRAirQGGvyxm2AeKsU52+M/qsUXHCfdQomsjRLkgNstXfn DgNw== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:in-reply-to:content-disposition :mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date :dkim-signature; bh=yji80IqE9NsUrm2qjHYl+CYcHu+/0cgfsh0mOrm4tfU=; b=jmQozdLWvrh01bIPnh4+lDv7WqaQuNM6HdSotbAZx16fuXMQXiKOWArjeOsE4AthgR SOGltF8Ol9rWqWbxhW5N2aZyQ9hnERNzqqNy+NrxobzvJQdtdVTrRyq8rbll+7IfTKSC //qbs1WJSpKiO/hbwoKqNDt5HNMG/OQLc+ViFqdz+c6qbGe4jTKe+baDZltcDcmmhB7k JVi4ho3nM1ucf9Pt/jO0uKL2ykUc7DHk7YL9wM9nC0EqvjZRx2QRBQ5Comp5m6YGQSgU 0vQ6w7BpGcGu5wV1UepZaWfINmP3ng85Lam/AgjlslZbbOXCwGnbgaAOAqB7RMv7YhWg r47A== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@linaro.org header.s=google header.b=iLnyduFA; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 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. [23.128.96.18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id g3si147062edp.190.2020.05.05.18.05.37; Tue, 05 May 2020 18:06:01 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@linaro.org header.s=google header.b=iLnyduFA; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 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 S1729247AbgEFBBN (ORCPT + 99 others); Tue, 5 May 2020 21:01:13 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:37266 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-FAIL-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728969AbgEFBBN (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 May 2020 21:01:13 -0400 Received: from mail-pj1-x1043.google.com (mail-pj1-x1043.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::1043]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0E98CC061A10 for ; Tue, 5 May 2020 18:01:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pj1-x1043.google.com with SMTP id a32so37049pje.5 for ; Tue, 05 May 2020 18:01:13 -0700 (PDT) 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; bh=yji80IqE9NsUrm2qjHYl+CYcHu+/0cgfsh0mOrm4tfU=; b=iLnyduFABEAWDas3tD7tztIH5Y2tiyij++05Nk1xtGg51TAC0bGr+Zp/9YMQa+52oi gH80NQyjESwq00DvmIlllGyz2g6bZBMKL0Vvv0MAq8ImoYmpXGi6LCGMbA8MSguslPky vUsgDvo/ytXGSzGnpFtyaJzY1Npscpk+RoETramWvIBH/czBqbxxvZHJJ7ieYtBXicYI 1SjW387MflWyKz0kwLi2CL0amGsf2Mby+x2HjR8+Awyo6m2PexuzKaxI/MNXUcM5cXFv CIIY4gCbpwPasWDXkuEseRVAF4u9mjtibhuw4EU59nU+4+Y2BQXOx7d6SbVsKVt/tG8b XCJQ== 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; bh=yji80IqE9NsUrm2qjHYl+CYcHu+/0cgfsh0mOrm4tfU=; b=YnrtJF8JR489eYTEeKiFM0cjbZ6A2ssSvfIp20p5YX5zGOXs1GF8xFLxKqbMtb1mM3 QyyqisVeJlxyT5YEdLz1FjPbsfeSSdCHKAlA+YWws/if9P6zsySCDBR03+s3quOg62+L WnwPHLmtuobAKMidcrfIVNx8SfqFLzbGc8UyFYTC6nvTItNgVkzWKYoBNHodtuoCLm6y 6Jk7dK5Vd5aFcnYe0c7U7eN4Bc8Ugam/7/aHZKkXuPyXN0V+fvNbxa88FCVveRkacriX ZmwMzZnGM2pTV5XAiNoh/o6vOoOGmz0WE4PKz66vXK+ZUDL5IvKQkGcmXFBrRSKNUUds EzBA== X-Gm-Message-State: AGi0PuZ1/aJzLQmXhPOX37INVQ1CzgsYTYoF+VCT6h+lc/kF2Lti+8ZH qUmIlSbUrW7yhodL4eOuciEpMQ== X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:9e16:: with SMTP id d22mr5778574plq.332.1588726872310; Tue, 05 May 2020 18:01:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from builder.lan (104-188-17-28.lightspeed.sndgca.sbcglobal.net. [104.188.17.28]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id c187sm65996pfc.63.2020.05.05.18.01.10 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 05 May 2020 18:01:11 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 5 May 2020 18:01:56 -0700 From: Bjorn Andersson To: Mathieu Poirier Cc: ohad@wizery.com, loic.pallardy@st.com, arnaud.pouliquen@st.com, s-anna@ti.com, linux-remoteproc@vger.kernel.org, corbet@lwn.net, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 09/14] remoteproc: Deal with synchronisation when crashing Message-ID: <20200506010156.GF2329931@builder.lan> References: <20200424200135.28825-1-mathieu.poirier@linaro.org> <20200424200135.28825-10-mathieu.poirier@linaro.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200424200135.28825-10-mathieu.poirier@linaro.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri 24 Apr 13:01 PDT 2020, Mathieu Poirier wrote: > Refactor function rproc_trigger_recovery() in order to avoid > reloading the firmware image when synchronising with a remote > processor rather than booting it. Also part of the process, > properly set the synchronisation flag in order to properly > recover the system. > > Signed-off-by: Mathieu Poirier > --- > drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c | 23 ++++++++++++++------ > drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_internal.h | 27 ++++++++++++++++++++++++ > 2 files changed, 43 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c > index ef88d3e84bfb..3a84a38ba37b 100644 > --- a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c > +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c > @@ -1697,7 +1697,7 @@ static void rproc_coredump(struct rproc *rproc) > */ > int rproc_trigger_recovery(struct rproc *rproc) > { > - const struct firmware *firmware_p; > + const struct firmware *firmware_p = NULL; > struct device *dev = &rproc->dev; > int ret; > > @@ -1718,14 +1718,16 @@ int rproc_trigger_recovery(struct rproc *rproc) > /* generate coredump */ > rproc_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; > + /* load firmware if need be */ > + if (!rproc_needs_syncing(rproc)) { > + 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 */ > + /* boot up or synchronise with the remote processor again */ > ret = rproc_start(rproc, firmware_p); > > release_firmware(firmware_p); > @@ -1761,6 +1763,13 @@ static void rproc_crash_handler_work(struct work_struct *work) > dev_err(dev, "handling crash #%u in %s\n", ++rproc->crash_cnt, > rproc->name); > > + /* > + * The remote processor has crashed - tell the core what operation > + * to use from hereon, i.e whether an external entity will reboot > + * the MCU or it is now the remoteproc core's responsability. > + */ > + rproc_set_sync_flag(rproc, RPROC_SYNC_STATE_CRASHED); If I follow the logic correctly, you're essentially using rproc->sync_with_rproc to pass an additional parameter down through rproc_trigger_recovery() to tell everyone below to "load firmware and boot the core or not". And given that the comment alludes to some unknown logic determining the continuation I think it would be much preferable to essentially just pass rproc->sync_flags.after_crash down through these functions. And per my comment on a previous patch, is there any synchronization with the remote controller when this happens? Regards, Bjorn > + > mutex_unlock(&rproc->lock); > > if (!rproc->recovery_disabled) > diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_internal.h b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_internal.h > index 3985c084b184..61500981155c 100644 > --- a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_internal.h > +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_internal.h > @@ -24,6 +24,33 @@ struct rproc_debug_trace { > struct rproc_mem_entry trace_mem; > }; > > +/* > + * enum rproc_sync_states - remote processsor sync states > + * > + * @RPROC_SYNC_STATE_CRASHED state to use after the remote processor > + * has crashed but has not been recovered by > + * the remoteproc core yet. > + * > + * Keeping these separate from the enum rproc_state in order to avoid > + * introducing coupling between the state of the MCU and the synchronisation > + * operation to use. > + */ > +enum rproc_sync_states { > + RPROC_SYNC_STATE_CRASHED, > +}; > + > +static inline void rproc_set_sync_flag(struct rproc *rproc, > + enum rproc_sync_states state) > +{ > + switch (state) { > + case RPROC_SYNC_STATE_CRASHED: > + rproc->sync_with_rproc = rproc->sync_flags.after_crash; > + break; > + default: > + break; > + } > +} > + > /* from remoteproc_core.c */ > void rproc_release(struct kref *kref); > irqreturn_t rproc_vq_interrupt(struct rproc *rproc, int vq_id); > -- > 2.20.1 >