| Message ID | 20240716013953.1715134-1-tanmay.shah@amd.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Superseded |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [v2] remoteproc: xlnx: add sram support | expand |
Good morning, On Mon, Jul 15, 2024 at 06:39:54PM -0700, Tanmay Shah wrote: > AMD-Xilinx zynqmp platform contains on-chip sram memory (OCM). > R5 cores can access OCM and access is faster than DDR memory but slower > than TCM memories available. Sram region can have optional multiple > power-domains. Platform management firmware is responsible > to operate these power-domains. > > Signed-off-by: Tanmay Shah <tanmay.shah@amd.com> > --- > > Changes in v2: > - Expand commit message with power-domains related information. > > drivers/remoteproc/xlnx_r5_remoteproc.c | 131 ++++++++++++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 131 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/xlnx_r5_remoteproc.c b/drivers/remoteproc/xlnx_r5_remoteproc.c > index 596f3ffb8935..52ddd42b09e0 100644 > --- a/drivers/remoteproc/xlnx_r5_remoteproc.c > +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/xlnx_r5_remoteproc.c > @@ -56,6 +56,17 @@ struct mem_bank_data { > char *bank_name; > }; > > +/** > + * struct zynqmp_sram_bank - sram bank description > + * > + * @sram_res: sram address region information > + * @da: device address of sram > + */ > +struct zynqmp_sram_bank { > + struct resource sram_res; > + u32 da; > +}; > + > /** > * struct mbox_info > * > @@ -120,6 +131,8 @@ static const struct mem_bank_data zynqmp_tcm_banks_lockstep[] = { > * struct zynqmp_r5_core > * > * @rsc_tbl_va: resource table virtual address > + * @sram: Array of sram memories assigned to this core > + * @num_sram: number of sram for this core > * @dev: device of RPU instance > * @np: device node of RPU instance > * @tcm_bank_count: number TCM banks accessible to this RPU > @@ -131,6 +144,8 @@ static const struct mem_bank_data zynqmp_tcm_banks_lockstep[] = { > */ > struct zynqmp_r5_core { > void __iomem *rsc_tbl_va; > + struct zynqmp_sram_bank **sram; I suggest making @sram an array rather than an array of pointers - it would simplify function zynqmp_r5_get_sram_banks(). > + int num_sram; > struct device *dev; > struct device_node *np; > int tcm_bank_count; > @@ -494,6 +509,40 @@ static int add_mem_regions_carveout(struct rproc *rproc) > return 0; > } > > +static int add_sram_carveouts(struct rproc *rproc) > +{ > + struct zynqmp_r5_core *r5_core = rproc->priv; > + struct rproc_mem_entry *rproc_mem; > + struct zynqmp_sram_bank *sram; > + dma_addr_t dma_addr; > + size_t len; > + int da, i; > + > + for (i = 0; i < r5_core->num_sram; i++) { > + sram = r5_core->sram[i]; > + > + dma_addr = (dma_addr_t)sram->sram_res.start; > + len = resource_size(&sram->sram_res); > + da = sram->da; > + > + /* Register associated reserved memory regions */ > + rproc_mem = rproc_mem_entry_init(&rproc->dev, NULL, > + (dma_addr_t)dma_addr, > + len, da, > + zynqmp_r5_mem_region_map, > + zynqmp_r5_mem_region_unmap, > + sram->sram_res.name); > + > + rproc_add_carveout(rproc, rproc_mem); > + rproc_coredump_add_segment(rproc, da, len); > + > + dev_dbg(&rproc->dev, "sram carveout %s addr=%llx, da=0x%x, size=0x%lx", > + sram->sram_res.name, dma_addr, da, len); > + } > + > + return 0; > +} > + > /* > * tcm_mem_unmap() > * @rproc: single R5 core's corresponding rproc instance > @@ -669,6 +718,12 @@ static int zynqmp_r5_rproc_prepare(struct rproc *rproc) > return ret; > } > > + ret = add_sram_carveouts(rproc); > + if (ret) { > + dev_err(&rproc->dev, "failed to get sram carveout %d\n", ret); > + return ret; > + } > + > return 0; > } > > @@ -881,6 +936,78 @@ static struct zynqmp_r5_core *zynqmp_r5_add_rproc_core(struct device *cdev) > return ERR_PTR(ret); > } > > +static int zynqmp_r5_get_sram_banks(struct zynqmp_r5_core *r5_core) > +{ > + struct zynqmp_sram_bank **sram, *sram_data; > + struct device_node *np = r5_core->np; > + struct device *dev = r5_core->dev; > + struct device_node *sram_np; > + int num_sram, i, ret; > + u64 abs_addr, size; > + > + /* "sram" is optional proprty. Do not fail, if unavailable. */ s/proprty/property > + if (!of_find_property(r5_core->np, "sram", NULL)) > + return 0; > + > + num_sram = of_property_count_elems_of_size(np, "sram", sizeof(phandle)); > + if (num_sram <= 0) { Any reason this is "<" rather than "<=" ? > + dev_err(dev, "Invalid sram property, ret = %d\n", > + num_sram); > + return -EINVAL; > + } > + > + sram = devm_kcalloc(dev, num_sram, > + sizeof(struct zynqmp_sram_bank *), GFP_KERNEL); > + if (!sram) > + return -ENOMEM; > + > + for (i = 0; i < num_sram; i++) { > + sram_data = devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof(struct zynqmp_sram_bank), > + GFP_KERNEL); > + if (!sram_data) > + return -ENOMEM; > + > + sram_np = of_parse_phandle(np, "sram", i); > + if (!sram_np) { > + dev_err(dev, "failed to get sram %d phandle\n", i); > + return -EINVAL; > + } > + > + if (!of_device_is_available(sram_np)) { > + of_node_put(sram_np); > + dev_err(dev, "sram device not available\n"); > + return -EINVAL; > + } > + > + ret = of_address_to_resource(sram_np, 0, &sram_data->sram_res); > + of_node_put(sram_np); Why calling this here when sram_np is used below? > + if (ret) { > + dev_err(dev, "addr to res failed\n"); > + return ret; > + } > + > + /* Get SRAM device address */ > + ret = of_property_read_reg(sram_np, i, &abs_addr, &size); > + if (ret) { > + dev_err(dev, "failed to get reg property\n"); > + return ret; > + } > + > + sram_data->da = (u32)abs_addr; > + > + sram[i] = sram_data; > + > + dev_dbg(dev, "sram %d: name=%s, addr=0x%llx, da=0x%x, size=0x%llx\n", > + i, sram[i]->sram_res.name, sram[i]->sram_res.start, > + sram[i]->da, resource_size(&sram[i]->sram_res)); > + } > + > + r5_core->sram = sram; > + r5_core->num_sram = num_sram; > + > + return 0; > +} > + > static int zynqmp_r5_get_tcm_node_from_dt(struct zynqmp_r5_cluster *cluster) > { > int i, j, tcm_bank_count, ret, tcm_pd_idx, pd_count; > @@ -1095,6 +1222,10 @@ static int zynqmp_r5_core_init(struct zynqmp_r5_cluster *cluster, > return ret; > } > } > + > + ret = zynqmp_r5_get_sram_banks(r5_core); > + if (ret) > + return ret; > } Thanks, Mathieu > > return 0; > > base-commit: d87dbfd31796f810ed777aee4919f211b4a6c7fb > -- > 2.25.1 >
Hello Mathieu, Thanks for reviews. All the comments looks good, I will send next revision addressing them all. On 7/22/24 11:39 AM, Mathieu Poirier wrote: > Good morning, > > On Mon, Jul 15, 2024 at 06:39:54PM -0700, Tanmay Shah wrote: >> AMD-Xilinx zynqmp platform contains on-chip sram memory (OCM). >> R5 cores can access OCM and access is faster than DDR memory but slower >> than TCM memories available. Sram region can have optional multiple >> power-domains. Platform management firmware is responsible >> to operate these power-domains. >> >> Signed-off-by: Tanmay Shah <tanmay.shah@amd.com> >> --- >> >> Changes in v2: >> - Expand commit message with power-domains related information. >> >> drivers/remoteproc/xlnx_r5_remoteproc.c | 131 ++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> 1 file changed, 131 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/xlnx_r5_remoteproc.c b/drivers/remoteproc/xlnx_r5_remoteproc.c >> index 596f3ffb8935..52ddd42b09e0 100644 >> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/xlnx_r5_remoteproc.c >> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/xlnx_r5_remoteproc.c >> @@ -56,6 +56,17 @@ struct mem_bank_data { >> char *bank_name; >> }; >> >> +/** >> + * struct zynqmp_sram_bank - sram bank description >> + * >> + * @sram_res: sram address region information >> + * @da: device address of sram >> + */ >> +struct zynqmp_sram_bank { >> + struct resource sram_res; >> + u32 da; >> +}; >> + >> /** >> * struct mbox_info >> * >> @@ -120,6 +131,8 @@ static const struct mem_bank_data zynqmp_tcm_banks_lockstep[] = { >> * struct zynqmp_r5_core >> * >> * @rsc_tbl_va: resource table virtual address >> + * @sram: Array of sram memories assigned to this core >> + * @num_sram: number of sram for this core >> * @dev: device of RPU instance >> * @np: device node of RPU instance >> * @tcm_bank_count: number TCM banks accessible to this RPU >> @@ -131,6 +144,8 @@ static const struct mem_bank_data zynqmp_tcm_banks_lockstep[] = { >> */ >> struct zynqmp_r5_core { >> void __iomem *rsc_tbl_va; >> + struct zynqmp_sram_bank **sram; > > I suggest making @sram an array rather than an array of pointers - it would > simplify function zynqmp_r5_get_sram_banks(). > Ack. >> + int num_sram; >> struct device *dev; >> struct device_node *np; >> int tcm_bank_count; >> @@ -494,6 +509,40 @@ static int add_mem_regions_carveout(struct rproc *rproc) >> return 0; >> } >> >> +static int add_sram_carveouts(struct rproc *rproc) >> +{ >> + struct zynqmp_r5_core *r5_core = rproc->priv; >> + struct rproc_mem_entry *rproc_mem; >> + struct zynqmp_sram_bank *sram; >> + dma_addr_t dma_addr; >> + size_t len; >> + int da, i; >> + >> + for (i = 0; i < r5_core->num_sram; i++) { >> + sram = r5_core->sram[i]; >> + >> + dma_addr = (dma_addr_t)sram->sram_res.start; >> + len = resource_size(&sram->sram_res); >> + da = sram->da; >> + >> + /* Register associated reserved memory regions */ >> + rproc_mem = rproc_mem_entry_init(&rproc->dev, NULL, >> + (dma_addr_t)dma_addr, >> + len, da, >> + zynqmp_r5_mem_region_map, >> + zynqmp_r5_mem_region_unmap, >> + sram->sram_res.name); >> + >> + rproc_add_carveout(rproc, rproc_mem); >> + rproc_coredump_add_segment(rproc, da, len); >> + >> + dev_dbg(&rproc->dev, "sram carveout %s addr=%llx, da=0x%x, size=0x%lx", >> + sram->sram_res.name, dma_addr, da, len); >> + } >> + >> + return 0; >> +} >> + >> /* >> * tcm_mem_unmap() >> * @rproc: single R5 core's corresponding rproc instance >> @@ -669,6 +718,12 @@ static int zynqmp_r5_rproc_prepare(struct rproc *rproc) >> return ret; >> } >> >> + ret = add_sram_carveouts(rproc); >> + if (ret) { >> + dev_err(&rproc->dev, "failed to get sram carveout %d\n", ret); >> + return ret; >> + } >> + >> return 0; >> } >> >> @@ -881,6 +936,78 @@ static struct zynqmp_r5_core *zynqmp_r5_add_rproc_core(struct device *cdev) >> return ERR_PTR(ret); >> } >> >> +static int zynqmp_r5_get_sram_banks(struct zynqmp_r5_core *r5_core) >> +{ >> + struct zynqmp_sram_bank **sram, *sram_data; >> + struct device_node *np = r5_core->np; >> + struct device *dev = r5_core->dev; >> + struct device_node *sram_np; >> + int num_sram, i, ret; >> + u64 abs_addr, size; >> + >> + /* "sram" is optional proprty. Do not fail, if unavailable. */ > > s/proprty/property Ack. > >> + if (!of_find_property(r5_core->np, "sram", NULL)) >> + return 0; >> + >> + num_sram = of_property_count_elems_of_size(np, "sram", sizeof(phandle)); >> + if (num_sram <= 0) { > > Any reason this is "<" rather than "<=" ? I will make it < 1. > >> + dev_err(dev, "Invalid sram property, ret = %d\n", >> + num_sram); >> + return -EINVAL; >> + } >> + >> + sram = devm_kcalloc(dev, num_sram, >> + sizeof(struct zynqmp_sram_bank *), GFP_KERNEL); >> + if (!sram) >> + return -ENOMEM; >> + >> + for (i = 0; i < num_sram; i++) { >> + sram_data = devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof(struct zynqmp_sram_bank), >> + GFP_KERNEL); >> + if (!sram_data) >> + return -ENOMEM; >> + >> + sram_np = of_parse_phandle(np, "sram", i); >> + if (!sram_np) { >> + dev_err(dev, "failed to get sram %d phandle\n", i); >> + return -EINVAL; >> + } >> + >> + if (!of_device_is_available(sram_np)) { >> + of_node_put(sram_np); >> + dev_err(dev, "sram device not available\n"); >> + return -EINVAL; >> + } >> + >> + ret = of_address_to_resource(sram_np, 0, &sram_data->sram_res); >> + of_node_put(sram_np); > > Why calling this here when sram_np is used below? > Ack. I wanted to keep of_node_put as close as of_node_get. But, I think within same function I can move of_node_put after all use of sram_np. I didn't face any runtime errors though, so I am wondering is it required ? I will move it anyway as suggested. >> + if (ret) { >> + dev_err(dev, "addr to res failed\n"); >> + return ret; >> + } >> + >> + /* Get SRAM device address */ >> + ret = of_property_read_reg(sram_np, i, &abs_addr, &size); >> + if (ret) { >> + dev_err(dev, "failed to get reg property\n"); >> + return ret; >> + } >> + >> + sram_data->da = (u32)abs_addr; >> + >> + sram[i] = sram_data; >> + >> + dev_dbg(dev, "sram %d: name=%s, addr=0x%llx, da=0x%x, size=0x%llx\n", >> + i, sram[i]->sram_res.name, sram[i]->sram_res.start, >> + sram[i]->da, resource_size(&sram[i]->sram_res)); >> + } >> + >> + r5_core->sram = sram; >> + r5_core->num_sram = num_sram; >> + >> + return 0; >> +} >> + >> static int zynqmp_r5_get_tcm_node_from_dt(struct zynqmp_r5_cluster *cluster) >> { >> int i, j, tcm_bank_count, ret, tcm_pd_idx, pd_count; >> @@ -1095,6 +1222,10 @@ static int zynqmp_r5_core_init(struct zynqmp_r5_cluster *cluster, >> return ret; >> } >> } >> + >> + ret = zynqmp_r5_get_sram_banks(r5_core); >> + if (ret) >> + return ret; >> } > > Thanks, > Mathieu > >> >> return 0; >> >> base-commit: d87dbfd31796f810ed777aee4919f211b4a6c7fb >> -- >> 2.25.1 >>
On Wed, 24 Jul 2024 at 16:04, Tanmay Shah <tanmay.shah@amd.com> wrote: > > Hello Mathieu, > > Thanks for reviews. > > All the comments looks good, I will send next revision addressing them all. > > On 7/22/24 11:39 AM, Mathieu Poirier wrote: > > Good morning, > > > > On Mon, Jul 15, 2024 at 06:39:54PM -0700, Tanmay Shah wrote: > >> AMD-Xilinx zynqmp platform contains on-chip sram memory (OCM). > >> R5 cores can access OCM and access is faster than DDR memory but slower > >> than TCM memories available. Sram region can have optional multiple > >> power-domains. Platform management firmware is responsible > >> to operate these power-domains. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Tanmay Shah <tanmay.shah@amd.com> > >> --- > >> > >> Changes in v2: > >> - Expand commit message with power-domains related information. > >> > >> drivers/remoteproc/xlnx_r5_remoteproc.c | 131 ++++++++++++++++++++++++ > >> 1 file changed, 131 insertions(+) > >> > >> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/xlnx_r5_remoteproc.c b/drivers/remoteproc/xlnx_r5_remoteproc.c > >> index 596f3ffb8935..52ddd42b09e0 100644 > >> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/xlnx_r5_remoteproc.c > >> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/xlnx_r5_remoteproc.c > >> @@ -56,6 +56,17 @@ struct mem_bank_data { > >> char *bank_name; > >> }; > >> > >> +/** > >> + * struct zynqmp_sram_bank - sram bank description > >> + * > >> + * @sram_res: sram address region information > >> + * @da: device address of sram > >> + */ > >> +struct zynqmp_sram_bank { > >> + struct resource sram_res; > >> + u32 da; > >> +}; > >> + > >> /** > >> * struct mbox_info > >> * > >> @@ -120,6 +131,8 @@ static const struct mem_bank_data zynqmp_tcm_banks_lockstep[] = { > >> * struct zynqmp_r5_core > >> * > >> * @rsc_tbl_va: resource table virtual address > >> + * @sram: Array of sram memories assigned to this core > >> + * @num_sram: number of sram for this core > >> * @dev: device of RPU instance > >> * @np: device node of RPU instance > >> * @tcm_bank_count: number TCM banks accessible to this RPU > >> @@ -131,6 +144,8 @@ static const struct mem_bank_data zynqmp_tcm_banks_lockstep[] = { > >> */ > >> struct zynqmp_r5_core { > >> void __iomem *rsc_tbl_va; > >> + struct zynqmp_sram_bank **sram; > > > > I suggest making @sram an array rather than an array of pointers - it would > > simplify function zynqmp_r5_get_sram_banks(). > > > > Ack. > > >> + int num_sram; > >> struct device *dev; > >> struct device_node *np; > >> int tcm_bank_count; > >> @@ -494,6 +509,40 @@ static int add_mem_regions_carveout(struct rproc *rproc) > >> return 0; > >> } > >> > >> +static int add_sram_carveouts(struct rproc *rproc) > >> +{ > >> + struct zynqmp_r5_core *r5_core = rproc->priv; > >> + struct rproc_mem_entry *rproc_mem; > >> + struct zynqmp_sram_bank *sram; > >> + dma_addr_t dma_addr; > >> + size_t len; > >> + int da, i; > >> + > >> + for (i = 0; i < r5_core->num_sram; i++) { > >> + sram = r5_core->sram[i]; > >> + > >> + dma_addr = (dma_addr_t)sram->sram_res.start; > >> + len = resource_size(&sram->sram_res); > >> + da = sram->da; > >> + > >> + /* Register associated reserved memory regions */ > >> + rproc_mem = rproc_mem_entry_init(&rproc->dev, NULL, > >> + (dma_addr_t)dma_addr, > >> + len, da, > >> + zynqmp_r5_mem_region_map, > >> + zynqmp_r5_mem_region_unmap, > >> + sram->sram_res.name); > >> + > >> + rproc_add_carveout(rproc, rproc_mem); > >> + rproc_coredump_add_segment(rproc, da, len); > >> + > >> + dev_dbg(&rproc->dev, "sram carveout %s addr=%llx, da=0x%x, size=0x%lx", > >> + sram->sram_res.name, dma_addr, da, len); > >> + } > >> + > >> + return 0; > >> +} > >> + > >> /* > >> * tcm_mem_unmap() > >> * @rproc: single R5 core's corresponding rproc instance > >> @@ -669,6 +718,12 @@ static int zynqmp_r5_rproc_prepare(struct rproc *rproc) > >> return ret; > >> } > >> > >> + ret = add_sram_carveouts(rproc); > >> + if (ret) { > >> + dev_err(&rproc->dev, "failed to get sram carveout %d\n", ret); > >> + return ret; > >> + } > >> + > >> return 0; > >> } > >> > >> @@ -881,6 +936,78 @@ static struct zynqmp_r5_core *zynqmp_r5_add_rproc_core(struct device *cdev) > >> return ERR_PTR(ret); > >> } > >> > >> +static int zynqmp_r5_get_sram_banks(struct zynqmp_r5_core *r5_core) > >> +{ > >> + struct zynqmp_sram_bank **sram, *sram_data; > >> + struct device_node *np = r5_core->np; > >> + struct device *dev = r5_core->dev; > >> + struct device_node *sram_np; > >> + int num_sram, i, ret; > >> + u64 abs_addr, size; > >> + > >> + /* "sram" is optional proprty. Do not fail, if unavailable. */ > > > > s/proprty/property > > Ack. > > > > >> + if (!of_find_property(r5_core->np, "sram", NULL)) > >> + return 0; > >> + > >> + num_sram = of_property_count_elems_of_size(np, "sram", sizeof(phandle)); > >> + if (num_sram <= 0) { > > > > Any reason this is "<" rather than "<=" ? > > I will make it < 1. > I had another read at the documentation of function of_property_count_elems_of_size() - what you had will work just fine. You can disregard this comment. > > > >> + dev_err(dev, "Invalid sram property, ret = %d\n", > >> + num_sram); > >> + return -EINVAL; > >> + } > >> + > >> + sram = devm_kcalloc(dev, num_sram, > >> + sizeof(struct zynqmp_sram_bank *), GFP_KERNEL); > >> + if (!sram) > >> + return -ENOMEM; > >> + > >> + for (i = 0; i < num_sram; i++) { > >> + sram_data = devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof(struct zynqmp_sram_bank), > >> + GFP_KERNEL); > >> + if (!sram_data) > >> + return -ENOMEM; > >> + > >> + sram_np = of_parse_phandle(np, "sram", i); > >> + if (!sram_np) { > >> + dev_err(dev, "failed to get sram %d phandle\n", i); > >> + return -EINVAL; > >> + } > >> + > >> + if (!of_device_is_available(sram_np)) { > >> + of_node_put(sram_np); > >> + dev_err(dev, "sram device not available\n"); > >> + return -EINVAL; > >> + } > >> + > >> + ret = of_address_to_resource(sram_np, 0, &sram_data->sram_res); > >> + of_node_put(sram_np); > > > > Why calling this here when sram_np is used below? > > > > Ack. > I wanted to keep of_node_put as close as of_node_get. > But, I think within same function I can move of_node_put after all use of sram_np. > > I didn't face any runtime errors though, so I am wondering is it required ? It is required to keep a proper reference count of the node. > > I will move it anyway as suggested. > > >> + if (ret) { > >> + dev_err(dev, "addr to res failed\n"); > >> + return ret; > >> + } > >> + > >> + /* Get SRAM device address */ > >> + ret = of_property_read_reg(sram_np, i, &abs_addr, &size); > >> + if (ret) { > >> + dev_err(dev, "failed to get reg property\n"); > >> + return ret; > >> + } > >> + > >> + sram_data->da = (u32)abs_addr; > >> + > >> + sram[i] = sram_data; > >> + > >> + dev_dbg(dev, "sram %d: name=%s, addr=0x%llx, da=0x%x, size=0x%llx\n", > >> + i, sram[i]->sram_res.name, sram[i]->sram_res.start, > >> + sram[i]->da, resource_size(&sram[i]->sram_res)); > >> + } > >> + > >> + r5_core->sram = sram; > >> + r5_core->num_sram = num_sram; > >> + > >> + return 0; > >> +} > >> + > >> static int zynqmp_r5_get_tcm_node_from_dt(struct zynqmp_r5_cluster *cluster) > >> { > >> int i, j, tcm_bank_count, ret, tcm_pd_idx, pd_count; > >> @@ -1095,6 +1222,10 @@ static int zynqmp_r5_core_init(struct zynqmp_r5_cluster *cluster, > >> return ret; > >> } > >> } > >> + > >> + ret = zynqmp_r5_get_sram_banks(r5_core); > >> + if (ret) > >> + return ret; > >> } > > > > Thanks, > > Mathieu > > > >> > >> return 0; > >> > >> base-commit: d87dbfd31796f810ed777aee4919f211b4a6c7fb > >> -- > >> 2.25.1 > >> >
diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/xlnx_r5_remoteproc.c b/drivers/remoteproc/xlnx_r5_remoteproc.c index 596f3ffb8935..52ddd42b09e0 100644 --- a/drivers/remoteproc/xlnx_r5_remoteproc.c +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/xlnx_r5_remoteproc.c @@ -56,6 +56,17 @@ struct mem_bank_data { char *bank_name; }; +/** + * struct zynqmp_sram_bank - sram bank description + * + * @sram_res: sram address region information + * @da: device address of sram + */ +struct zynqmp_sram_bank { + struct resource sram_res; + u32 da; +}; + /** * struct mbox_info * @@ -120,6 +131,8 @@ static const struct mem_bank_data zynqmp_tcm_banks_lockstep[] = { * struct zynqmp_r5_core * * @rsc_tbl_va: resource table virtual address + * @sram: Array of sram memories assigned to this core + * @num_sram: number of sram for this core * @dev: device of RPU instance * @np: device node of RPU instance * @tcm_bank_count: number TCM banks accessible to this RPU @@ -131,6 +144,8 @@ static const struct mem_bank_data zynqmp_tcm_banks_lockstep[] = { */ struct zynqmp_r5_core { void __iomem *rsc_tbl_va; + struct zynqmp_sram_bank **sram; + int num_sram; struct device *dev; struct device_node *np; int tcm_bank_count; @@ -494,6 +509,40 @@ static int add_mem_regions_carveout(struct rproc *rproc) return 0; } +static int add_sram_carveouts(struct rproc *rproc) +{ + struct zynqmp_r5_core *r5_core = rproc->priv; + struct rproc_mem_entry *rproc_mem; + struct zynqmp_sram_bank *sram; + dma_addr_t dma_addr; + size_t len; + int da, i; + + for (i = 0; i < r5_core->num_sram; i++) { + sram = r5_core->sram[i]; + + dma_addr = (dma_addr_t)sram->sram_res.start; + len = resource_size(&sram->sram_res); + da = sram->da; + + /* Register associated reserved memory regions */ + rproc_mem = rproc_mem_entry_init(&rproc->dev, NULL, + (dma_addr_t)dma_addr, + len, da, + zynqmp_r5_mem_region_map, + zynqmp_r5_mem_region_unmap, + sram->sram_res.name); + + rproc_add_carveout(rproc, rproc_mem); + rproc_coredump_add_segment(rproc, da, len); + + dev_dbg(&rproc->dev, "sram carveout %s addr=%llx, da=0x%x, size=0x%lx", + sram->sram_res.name, dma_addr, da, len); + } + + return 0; +} + /* * tcm_mem_unmap() * @rproc: single R5 core's corresponding rproc instance @@ -669,6 +718,12 @@ static int zynqmp_r5_rproc_prepare(struct rproc *rproc) return ret; } + ret = add_sram_carveouts(rproc); + if (ret) { + dev_err(&rproc->dev, "failed to get sram carveout %d\n", ret); + return ret; + } + return 0; } @@ -881,6 +936,78 @@ static struct zynqmp_r5_core *zynqmp_r5_add_rproc_core(struct device *cdev) return ERR_PTR(ret); } +static int zynqmp_r5_get_sram_banks(struct zynqmp_r5_core *r5_core) +{ + struct zynqmp_sram_bank **sram, *sram_data; + struct device_node *np = r5_core->np; + struct device *dev = r5_core->dev; + struct device_node *sram_np; + int num_sram, i, ret; + u64 abs_addr, size; + + /* "sram" is optional proprty. Do not fail, if unavailable. */ + if (!of_find_property(r5_core->np, "sram", NULL)) + return 0; + + num_sram = of_property_count_elems_of_size(np, "sram", sizeof(phandle)); + if (num_sram <= 0) { + dev_err(dev, "Invalid sram property, ret = %d\n", + num_sram); + return -EINVAL; + } + + sram = devm_kcalloc(dev, num_sram, + sizeof(struct zynqmp_sram_bank *), GFP_KERNEL); + if (!sram) + return -ENOMEM; + + for (i = 0; i < num_sram; i++) { + sram_data = devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof(struct zynqmp_sram_bank), + GFP_KERNEL); + if (!sram_data) + return -ENOMEM; + + sram_np = of_parse_phandle(np, "sram", i); + if (!sram_np) { + dev_err(dev, "failed to get sram %d phandle\n", i); + return -EINVAL; + } + + if (!of_device_is_available(sram_np)) { + of_node_put(sram_np); + dev_err(dev, "sram device not available\n"); + return -EINVAL; + } + + ret = of_address_to_resource(sram_np, 0, &sram_data->sram_res); + of_node_put(sram_np); + if (ret) { + dev_err(dev, "addr to res failed\n"); + return ret; + } + + /* Get SRAM device address */ + ret = of_property_read_reg(sram_np, i, &abs_addr, &size); + if (ret) { + dev_err(dev, "failed to get reg property\n"); + return ret; + } + + sram_data->da = (u32)abs_addr; + + sram[i] = sram_data; + + dev_dbg(dev, "sram %d: name=%s, addr=0x%llx, da=0x%x, size=0x%llx\n", + i, sram[i]->sram_res.name, sram[i]->sram_res.start, + sram[i]->da, resource_size(&sram[i]->sram_res)); + } + + r5_core->sram = sram; + r5_core->num_sram = num_sram; + + return 0; +} + static int zynqmp_r5_get_tcm_node_from_dt(struct zynqmp_r5_cluster *cluster) { int i, j, tcm_bank_count, ret, tcm_pd_idx, pd_count; @@ -1095,6 +1222,10 @@ static int zynqmp_r5_core_init(struct zynqmp_r5_cluster *cluster, return ret; } } + + ret = zynqmp_r5_get_sram_banks(r5_core); + if (ret) + return ret; } return 0;
AMD-Xilinx zynqmp platform contains on-chip sram memory (OCM). R5 cores can access OCM and access is faster than DDR memory but slower than TCM memories available. Sram region can have optional multiple power-domains. Platform management firmware is responsible to operate these power-domains. Signed-off-by: Tanmay Shah <tanmay.shah@amd.com> --- Changes in v2: - Expand commit message with power-domains related information. drivers/remoteproc/xlnx_r5_remoteproc.c | 131 ++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 131 insertions(+) base-commit: d87dbfd31796f810ed777aee4919f211b4a6c7fb