Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-128140-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 139.178.88.99 as permitted sender) client-ip=139.178.88.99;
Message-ID: <1f38ce24-83fa-4370-b036-b6c4bcb39fb3@collabora.com>
Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2024 16:33:06 +0200
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] remoteproc: mediatek: Don't parse extraneous subnodes
 for multi-core
To: Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@linaro.org>
Cc: andersson@kernel.org, matthias.bgg@gmail.com, tzungbi@kernel.org,
 tinghan.shen@mediatek.com, linux-remoteproc@vger.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
 linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org, wenst@chromium.org, kernel@collabora.com
References: <20240321084614.45253-1-angelogioacchino.delregno@collabora.com>
 <20240321084614.45253-3-angelogioacchino.delregno@collabora.com>
 <ZfxRyMyUqyqtXy8n@p14s> <9ef4e974-740e-4698-bb38-f236521a425c@collabora.com>
 <ZgWA/E46i/CaoM74@p14s> <b6ed8710-1608-4343-8a58-5f8e0e16d10d@collabora.com>
 <CANLsYkyu69Pwv094XGfVomuu1Oixw3vxr42q6WOE4F3snATygw@mail.gmail.com>
From: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno <angelogioacchino.delregno@collabora.com>
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <CANLsYkyu69Pwv094XGfVomuu1Oixw3vxr42q6WOE4F3snATygw@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Il 02/04/24 16:23, Mathieu Poirier ha scritto:
> On Tue, 2 Apr 2024 at 03:56, AngeloGioacchino Del Regno
> <angelogioacchino.delregno@collabora.com> wrote:
>>
>> Il 28/03/24 15:38, Mathieu Poirier ha scritto:
>>> On Wed, Mar 27, 2024 at 01:49:58PM +0100, AngeloGioacchino Del Regno wrote:
>>>> Il 21/03/24 16:27, Mathieu Poirier ha scritto:
>>>>> On Thu, Mar 21, 2024 at 09:46:14AM +0100, AngeloGioacchino Del Regno wrote:
>>>>>> When probing multi-core SCP, this driver is parsing all sub-nodes of
>>>>>> the scp-cluster node, but one of those could be not an actual SCP core
>>>>>> and that would make the entire SCP cluster to fail probing for no good
>>>>>> reason.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> To fix that, in scp_add_multi_core() treat a subnode as a SCP Core by
>>>>>> parsing only available subnodes having compatible "mediatek,scp-core".
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Fixes: 1fdbf0cdde98 ("remoteproc: mediatek: Probe SCP cluster on multi-core SCP")
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno <angelogioacchino.delregno@collabora.com>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>     drivers/remoteproc/mtk_scp.c | 3 +++
>>>>>>     1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/mtk_scp.c b/drivers/remoteproc/mtk_scp.c
>>>>>> index 67518291a8ad..fbe1c232dae7 100644
>>>>>> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/mtk_scp.c
>>>>>> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/mtk_scp.c
>>>>>> @@ -1096,6 +1096,9 @@ static int scp_add_multi_core(struct platform_device *pdev,
>>>>>>             cluster_of_data = (const struct mtk_scp_of_data **)of_device_get_match_data(dev);
>>>>>>             for_each_available_child_of_node(np, child) {
>>>>>> +          if (!of_device_is_compatible(child, "mediatek,scp-core"))
>>>>>> +                  continue;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>
>>>>> Interesting - what else gets stashed under the remote processor node?  I don't
>>>>> see anything specified in the bindings.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Sorry for the late reply - well, in this precise moment in time, upstream,
>>>> nothing yet.
>>>>
>>>> I have noticed this while debugging some lockups and wanted to move the scp_adsp
>>>> clock controller node as child of the SCP node (as some of those clocks are located
>>>> *into the SCP's CFG register space*, and it's correct for that to be a child as one
>>>> of those do depend on the SCP being up - and I'll spare you the rest) and noticed
>>>> the unexpected behavior, as the SCP driver was treating those as an SCP core.
>>>>
>>>> There was no kernel panic, but the SCP would fail probing.
>>>>
>>>> This is anyway a missed requirement ... for platforms that want *both* two SCP
>>>> cores *and* the AudioDSP, as that'd at least be two nodes with the same iostart
>>>> (scp@1072000, clock-controller@1072000), other than the reasons I explained some
>>>> lines back.
>>>>
>>>> ...and that's why this commit was sent :-)
>>>>
>>>
>>> Please update the bindings with the extra clock requirement in your next
>>> revision.
>>>
>>
>> Ok.
>>
>> Can you please take only patch 1/2 of this series so that I can delay this one
>> for a bit? I don't have time to work on that exactly right now.
>>
> 
> It was added to rproc-next last week.
> 

Ah, sorry, didn't notice that.

Thanks again!