Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
From:   Luca Weiss <luca@z3ntu.xyz>
To:     Stephan Gerhold <stephan@gerhold.net>,
        Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@linaro.org>
Cc:     linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org,
        ~postmarketos/upstreaming@lists.sr.ht, phone-devel@vger.kernel.org,
        Vladimir Lypak <vladimir.lypak@gmail.com>,
        Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@somainline.org>,
        Andy Gross <agross@kernel.org>,
        Ohad Ben-Cohen <ohad@wizery.com>,
        Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@linaro.org>,
        linux-remoteproc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Srinivas Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla@linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 09/15] rpmsg: smd: Drop unnecessary condition for channel creation
Date:   Sun, 13 Feb 2022 21:51:09 +0100
Message-ID: <3503848.e9J7NaK4W3@g550jk>
In-Reply-To: <2615776.mvXUDI8C0e@g550jk>
References: <20220112194118.178026-1-luca@z3ntu.xyz> <Yfhjil3pfZLa5g3j@builder.lan> <2615776.mvXUDI8C0e@g550jk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Precedence: bulk

Hi Bjorn,

On Sonntag, 6. Februar 2022 21:17:22 CET Luca Weiss wrote:
> Hi Bjorn,
>=20
> On Montag, 31. J=E4nner 2022 23:32:42 CET Bjorn Andersson wrote:
> > On Sun 16 Jan 10:30 CST 2022, Stephan Gerhold wrote:
> > > On Sun, Jan 16, 2022 at 05:08:29PM +0100, Luca Weiss wrote:
> > > > On Mittwoch, 12. J=E4nner 2022 22:39:53 CET Stephan Gerhold wrote:
> > > > > On Wed, Jan 12, 2022 at 08:40:58PM +0100, Luca Weiss wrote:
> > > > > > From: Vladimir Lypak <vladimir.lypak@gmail.com>
> > > > > >=20
> > > > > > RPM Firmware on variety of newer SoCs such as MSM8917 (also lik=
ely
> > > > > > MSM8937, MSM8940, MSM8952), MSM8953 and on some MSM8916 devices)
> > > > > > doesn't
> > > > > > initiate opening of the SMD channel if it was previously opened=
 by
> > > > > > bootloader. This doesn't allow probing of smd-rpm driver on such
> > > > > > devices
> > > > > > because there is a check that requires RPM this behaviour.
> > > > > >=20
> > > > > > Signed-off-by: Vladimir Lypak <vladimir.lypak@gmail.com>
> > > > > > Signed-off-by: Luca Weiss <luca@z3ntu.xyz>
> > > > > > Reviewed-by: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@somainline.org>
> > > > >=20
> > > > > This is effectively a "Revert "Revert "rpmsg: smd: Create device =
for
> > > > > all
> > > > > channels""":
> > > > >=20
> > > > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-msm/20171212235857.10432-3-bjor=
n.a
> > > > > nd
> > > > > ersson @linaro.org/
> > > > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-msm/20180315181244.8859-1-bjorn=
=2Ean
> > > > > de
> > > > > rsson
> > > > > @linaro.org/
> > > > >=20
> > > > > Won't this cause the same regression reported by Srinivas again?
> > > >=20
> > > > Do you have any suggestion on another way to solve this? Without th=
is
> > > > commit the regulators just won't probe at all, I haven't looked very
> > > > deep into it though given this patch solves it.
> > > >=20
> > > > I guess worst case it'll become a devicetree property to enable this
> > > > quirk?
> > >=20
> > > My spontaneous suggestion would be to skip the check only for the
> > > "rpm_requests" channel, e.g. something like
> > >=20
> > > 	if (remote_state !=3D SMD_CHANNEL_OPENING &&
> > > =09
> > > 	    remote_state !=3D SMD_CHANNEL_OPENED &&
> > > 	    strcmp(channel->name, "rpm_requests")
> > > 	=09
> > > 		continue;
> > >=20
> > > This will avoid changing the behavior for anything but the RPM channe=
l.
> > > I don't think anything else is affected by the same problem (since the
> > > bootloader or earlier firmware should not make use of any other
> > > channel).
> > > Also, we definitely *always* want to open the channel to the RPM beca=
use
> > > otherwise almost everything breaks.
> >=20
> > Last time this came up I asked if someone could test if the RPM is stuck
> > in the state machine trying to close the channel and as such we could
> > kick it by making sure that we "ack" the closing of the channel and
> > hence it would come back up again.
> >=20
> > But I don't remember seeing any outcome of this.
>=20
> Do you have a link to this or should I go digging in the archives?

Replying to myself, I went searching but couldn't find anything. If you hav=
e=20
some PoC code I'd be happy to try but as I'm not familiar with rpm/smd at a=
ll=20
I'd have to read myself into it first.

If Stephans suggestion with the strcmp(channel->name, "rpm_requests") is ok=
=20
then I'd test this and use that in v2. I'd personally rather not spend too=
=20
much time on this issue right now as it's blocking msm8953 completely (no=20
regulators =3D no nothing),

Regards
Luca

>=20
> Regards
> Luca
>=20
> > > Many solutions are possible though so at the end it is mostly up to
> > > Bjorn to decide I think. :)
> >=20
> > I would prefer to get an answer to above question, but if that doesn't
> > work (or look like crap) I'm willing to take your suggestion of skipping
> > the continue for the rpm_requests channel. Obviously with a comment
> > above describing why we're carrying that special case.
> >=20
> > Regards,
> > Bjorn