Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::3:8 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::3:8;
Message-ID: <5d77a476-06ee-4319-8e20-eef1c6ad51c6@linaro.org>
Date:   Mon, 11 Dec 2023 12:19:37 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
From:   neil.armstrong@linaro.org
Reply-To: neil.armstrong@linaro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/3] remoteproc: qcom: pas: make region assign more
 generic
Content-Language: en-US, fr
To:     Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@linaro.org>,
        Andy Gross <agross@kernel.org>,
        Bjorn Andersson <andersson@kernel.org>,
        Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@linaro.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org>,
        Conor Dooley <conor+dt@kernel.org>,
        Manivannan Sadhasivam <mani@kernel.org>
Cc:     linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, linux-remoteproc@vger.kernel.org,
        devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Mukesh Ojha <quic_mojha@quicinc.com>
References: <20231208-topic-sm8650-upstream-remoteproc-v4-0-a96c3e5f0913@linaro.org>
 <20231208-topic-sm8650-upstream-remoteproc-v4-2-a96c3e5f0913@linaro.org>
 <76f18323-a59e-4724-96ec-6306e5dcd2dc@linaro.org>
 <374addd2-e336-4625-9e0c-45e5efe1eb47@linaro.org>
 <b4b0ed80-eed5-4045-8ceb-5b507c77e4e2@linaro.org>
Autocrypt: addr=neil.armstrong@linaro.org; keydata=
 xsBNBE1ZBs8BCAD78xVLsXPwV/2qQx2FaO/7mhWL0Qodw8UcQJnkrWmgTFRobtTWxuRx8WWP
 GTjuhvbleoQ5Cxjr+v+1ARGCH46MxFP5DwauzPekwJUD5QKZlaw/bURTLmS2id5wWi3lqVH4
 BVF2WzvGyyeV1o4RTCYDnZ9VLLylJ9bneEaIs/7cjCEbipGGFlfIML3sfqnIvMAxIMZrvcl9
 qPV2k+KQ7q+aXavU5W+yLNn7QtXUB530Zlk/d2ETgzQ5FLYYnUDAaRl+8JUTjc0CNOTpCeik
 80TZcE6f8M76Xa6yU8VcNko94Ck7iB4vj70q76P/J7kt98hklrr85/3NU3oti3nrIHmHABEB
 AAHNKk5laWwgQXJtc3Ryb25nIDxuZWlsLmFybXN0cm9uZ0BsaW5hcm8ub3JnPsLAkQQTAQoA
 OwIbIwULCQgHAwUVCgkICwUWAgMBAAIeAQIXgBYhBInsPQWERiF0UPIoSBaat7Gkz/iuBQJk
 Q5wSAhkBAAoJEBaat7Gkz/iuyhMIANiD94qDtUTJRfEW6GwXmtKWwl/mvqQtaTtZID2dos04
 YqBbshiJbejgVJjy+HODcNUIKBB3PSLaln4ltdsV73SBcwUNdzebfKspAQunCM22Mn6FBIxQ
 GizsMLcP/0FX4en9NaKGfK6ZdKK6kN1GR9YffMJd2P08EO8mHowmSRe/ExAODhAs9W7XXExw
 UNCY4pVJyRPpEhv373vvff60bHxc1k/FF9WaPscMt7hlkbFLUs85kHtQAmr8pV5Hy9ezsSRa
 GzJmiVclkPc2BY592IGBXRDQ38urXeM4nfhhvqA50b/nAEXc6FzqgXqDkEIwR66/Gbp0t3+r
 yQzpKRyQif3OwE0ETVkGzwEIALyKDN/OGURaHBVzwjgYq+ZtifvekdrSNl8TIDH8g1xicBYp
 QTbPn6bbSZbdvfeQPNCcD4/EhXZuhQXMcoJsQQQnO4vwVULmPGgtGf8PVc7dxKOeta+qUh6+
 SRh3vIcAUFHDT3f/Zdspz+e2E0hPV2hiSvICLk11qO6cyJE13zeNFoeY3ggrKY+IzbFomIZY
 4yG6xI99NIPEVE9lNBXBKIlewIyVlkOaYvJWSV+p5gdJXOvScNN1epm5YHmf9aE2ZjnqZGoM
 Mtsyw18YoX9BqMFInxqYQQ3j/HpVgTSvmo5ea5qQDDUaCsaTf8UeDcwYOtgI8iL4oHcsGtUX
 oUk33HEAEQEAAcLAXwQYAQIACQUCTVkGzwIbDAAKCRAWmrexpM/4rrXiB/sGbkQ6itMrAIfn
 M7IbRuiSZS1unlySUVYu3SD6YBYnNi3G5EpbwfBNuT3H8//rVvtOFK4OD8cRYkxXRQmTvqa3
 3eDIHu/zr1HMKErm+2SD6PO9umRef8V82o2oaCLvf4WeIssFjwB0b6a12opuRP7yo3E3gTCS
 KmbUuLv1CtxKQF+fUV1cVaTPMyT25Od+RC1K+iOR0F54oUJvJeq7fUzbn/KdlhA8XPGzwGRy
 4zcsPWvwnXgfe5tk680fEKZVwOZKIEuJC3v+/yZpQzDvGYJvbyix0lHnrCzq43WefRHI5XTT
 QbM0WUIBIcGmq38+OgUsMYu4NzLu7uZFAcmp6h8g
Organization: Linaro Developer Services
In-Reply-To: <b4b0ed80-eed5-4045-8ceb-5b507c77e4e2@linaro.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Precedence: bulk

On 11/12/2023 10:54, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
> On 11.12.2023 10:37, Neil Armstrong wrote:
>> On 09/12/2023 19:06, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
>>> On 8.12.2023 16:04, Neil Armstrong wrote:
>>>> The current memory region assign only supports a single
>>>> memory region.
>>>>
>>>> But new platforms introduces more regions to make the
>>>> memory requirements more flexible for various use cases.
>>>> Those new platforms also shares the memory region between the
>>>> DSP and HLOS.
>>>>
>>>> To handle this, make the region assign more generic in order
>>>> to support more than a single memory region and also permit
>>>> setting the regions permissions as shared.
>>>>
>>>> Reviewed-by: Mukesh Ojha <quic_mojha@quicinc.com>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Neil Armstrong <neil.armstrong@linaro.org>
>>>> ---
>>> [...]
>>>
>>>> +    for (offset = 0; offset < adsp->region_assign_count; ++offset) {
>>>> +        struct reserved_mem *rmem = NULL;
>>>> +
>>>> +        node = of_parse_phandle(adsp->dev->of_node, "memory-region",
>>>> +                    adsp->region_assign_idx + offset);
>>>> +        if (node)
>>>> +            rmem = of_reserved_mem_lookup(node);
>>>> +        of_node_put(node);
>>> Shouldn't this only be called when parse_phandle succeeds? (separate
>>> patch with a fix + cc stable if so?)
>>
>> It's not a bug, it was added like that because of_node_put() already
>> checks for a NULL pointer:
>> https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.7-rc5/source/drivers/of/dynamic.c#L45
> Ack
> 
>>
>>>
>>>> +        if (!rmem) {
>>>> +            dev_err(adsp->dev, "unable to resolve shareable memory-region index %d\n",
>>>> +                offset);
>>>> +            return -EINVAL;
>>>> +        }
>>>>    -    perm.vmid = QCOM_SCM_VMID_MSS_MSA;
>>>> -    perm.perm = QCOM_SCM_PERM_RW;
>>>> +        if (adsp->region_assign_shared)  {
>>>> +            perm[0].vmid = QCOM_SCM_VMID_HLOS;
>>>> +            perm[0].perm = QCOM_SCM_PERM_RW;
>>>> +            perm[1].vmid = adsp->region_assign_vmid;
>>>> +            perm[1].perm = QCOM_SCM_PERM_RW;
>>>> +            perm_size = 2;
>>>> +        } else {
>>>> +            perm[0].vmid = adsp->region_assign_vmid;
>>>> +            perm[0].perm = QCOM_SCM_PERM_RW;
>>>> +            perm_size = 1;
>>>> +        }
>>>>    -    adsp->region_assign_phys = rmem->base;
>>>> -    adsp->region_assign_size = rmem->size;
>>>> -    adsp->region_assign_perms = BIT(QCOM_SCM_VMID_HLOS);
>>>> +        adsp->region_assign_phys[offset] = rmem->base;
>>>> +        adsp->region_assign_size[offset] = rmem->size;
>>>> +        adsp->region_assign_perms[offset] = BIT(QCOM_SCM_VMID_HLOS);
>>>>    -    ret = qcom_scm_assign_mem(adsp->region_assign_phys,
>>>> -                  adsp->region_assign_size,
>>>> -                  &adsp->region_assign_perms,
>>> I think this should be renamed to region_assign_owner(s)
>>
>> Why ? this bitfield is names "perms" everywhere qcom_scm_assign_mem is used
> And IMO that's not correct - there's the qcom_scm_vmperm.perm field which
> is oneOf r/w/x/rw/rwx and this one is filled with ORed BIT()-ed elements
> allowed in qcom_scm_vmperm.vmid (QCOM_SCM_VMID_...)

Ok right I just use the same namings as in rmtfs_mem, fastrpc & ath10k/qmi,
but indeed the qcom_scm_assign_mem() 3rd param name is srcvm but doc says "vmid for current set of owners",
so yeah it could be named owners.

I'll send a v5 with the rename.

Neil


> 
> Konrad