| Message ID | 20240808074127.2688131-3-b-padhi@ti.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted |
| Headers | show |
| Series | Defer TI's Remoteproc's Probe until Mailbox is Probed | expand |
Hi Beleswar, On Thu, Aug 08, 2024 at 01:11:26PM +0530, Beleswar Padhi wrote: > Acquire the mailbox handle during device probe and do not release handle > in stop/detach routine or error paths. This removes the redundant > requests for mbox handle later during rproc start/attach. This also > allows to defer remoteproc driver's probe if mailbox is not probed yet. > > Signed-off-by: Beleswar Padhi <b-padhi@ti.com> > --- > drivers/remoteproc/ti_k3_r5_remoteproc.c | 78 +++++++++--------------- > 1 file changed, 30 insertions(+), 48 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/ti_k3_r5_remoteproc.c b/drivers/remoteproc/ti_k3_r5_remoteproc.c > index 57067308b3c0..8a63a9360c0f 100644 > --- a/drivers/remoteproc/ti_k3_r5_remoteproc.c > +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/ti_k3_r5_remoteproc.c > @@ -194,6 +194,10 @@ static void k3_r5_rproc_mbox_callback(struct mbox_client *client, void *data) > const char *name = kproc->rproc->name; > u32 msg = omap_mbox_message(data); > > + /* Do not forward message from a detached core */ > + if (kproc->rproc->state == RPROC_DETACHED) > + return; > + > dev_dbg(dev, "mbox msg: 0x%x\n", msg); > > switch (msg) { > @@ -229,6 +233,10 @@ static void k3_r5_rproc_kick(struct rproc *rproc, int vqid) > mbox_msg_t msg = (mbox_msg_t)vqid; > int ret; > > + /* Do not forward message to a detached core */ > + if (kproc->rproc->state == RPROC_DETACHED) > + return; > + > /* send the index of the triggered virtqueue in the mailbox payload */ > ret = mbox_send_message(kproc->mbox, (void *)msg); > if (ret < 0) > @@ -399,12 +407,9 @@ static int k3_r5_rproc_request_mbox(struct rproc *rproc) > client->knows_txdone = false; > > kproc->mbox = mbox_request_channel(client, 0); > - if (IS_ERR(kproc->mbox)) { > - ret = -EBUSY; > - dev_err(dev, "mbox_request_channel failed: %ld\n", > - PTR_ERR(kproc->mbox)); > - return ret; > - } > + if (IS_ERR(kproc->mbox)) > + return dev_err_probe(dev, PTR_ERR(kproc->mbox), > + "mbox_request_channel failed\n"); > > /* > * Ping the remote processor, this is only for sanity-sake for now; > @@ -552,10 +557,6 @@ static int k3_r5_rproc_start(struct rproc *rproc) > u32 boot_addr; > int ret; > > - ret = k3_r5_rproc_request_mbox(rproc); > - if (ret) > - return ret; > - > boot_addr = rproc->bootaddr; > /* TODO: add boot_addr sanity checking */ > dev_dbg(dev, "booting R5F core using boot addr = 0x%x\n", boot_addr); > @@ -564,7 +565,7 @@ static int k3_r5_rproc_start(struct rproc *rproc) > core = kproc->core; > ret = ti_sci_proc_set_config(core->tsp, boot_addr, 0, 0); > if (ret) > - goto put_mbox; > + return ret; > > /* unhalt/run all applicable cores */ > if (cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_LOCKSTEP) { > @@ -580,13 +581,12 @@ static int k3_r5_rproc_start(struct rproc *rproc) > if (core != core0 && core0->rproc->state == RPROC_OFFLINE) { > dev_err(dev, "%s: can not start core 1 before core 0\n", > __func__); > - ret = -EPERM; > - goto put_mbox; > + return -EPERM; > } > > ret = k3_r5_core_run(core); > if (ret) > - goto put_mbox; > + return ret; > } > > return 0; > @@ -596,8 +596,6 @@ static int k3_r5_rproc_start(struct rproc *rproc) > if (k3_r5_core_halt(core)) > dev_warn(core->dev, "core halt back failed\n"); > } > -put_mbox: > - mbox_free_channel(kproc->mbox); > return ret; > } > > @@ -658,8 +656,6 @@ static int k3_r5_rproc_stop(struct rproc *rproc) > goto out; > } > > - mbox_free_channel(kproc->mbox); > - > return 0; > > unroll_core_halt: > @@ -674,42 +670,22 @@ static int k3_r5_rproc_stop(struct rproc *rproc) > /* > * Attach to a running R5F remote processor (IPC-only mode) > * > - * The R5F attach callback only needs to request the mailbox, the remote > - * processor is already booted, so there is no need to issue any TI-SCI > - * commands to boot the R5F cores in IPC-only mode. This callback is invoked > - * only in IPC-only mode. > + * The R5F attach callback is a NOP. The remote processor is already booted, and > + * all required resources have been acquired during probe routine, so there is > + * no need to issue any TI-SCI commands to boot the R5F cores in IPC-only mode. > + * This callback is invoked only in IPC-only mode and exists because > + * rproc_validate() checks for its existence. Excellent documentation. > */ > -static int k3_r5_rproc_attach(struct rproc *rproc) > -{ > - struct k3_r5_rproc *kproc = rproc->priv; > - struct device *dev = kproc->dev; > - int ret; > - > - ret = k3_r5_rproc_request_mbox(rproc); > - if (ret) > - return ret; > - > - dev_info(dev, "R5F core initialized in IPC-only mode\n"); > - return 0; > -} > +static int k3_r5_rproc_attach(struct rproc *rproc) { return 0; } > > /* > * Detach from a running R5F remote processor (IPC-only mode) > * > - * The R5F detach callback performs the opposite operation to attach callback > - * and only needs to release the mailbox, the R5F cores are not stopped and > - * will be left in booted state in IPC-only mode. This callback is invoked > - * only in IPC-only mode. > + * The R5F detach callback is a NOP. The R5F cores are not stopped and will be > + * left in booted state in IPC-only mode. This callback is invoked only in > + * IPC-only mode and exists for sanity sake. I would add the part about detach() being a NOP to attach() above... > */ > -static int k3_r5_rproc_detach(struct rproc *rproc) > -{ > - struct k3_r5_rproc *kproc = rproc->priv; > - struct device *dev = kproc->dev; > - > - mbox_free_channel(kproc->mbox); > - dev_info(dev, "R5F core deinitialized in IPC-only mode\n"); > - return 0; > -} > +static int k3_r5_rproc_detach(struct rproc *rproc) { return 0; } ... and just remove this. Otherwise this patch looks good. > > /* > * This function implements the .get_loaded_rsc_table() callback and is used > @@ -1278,6 +1254,10 @@ static int k3_r5_cluster_rproc_init(struct platform_device *pdev) > kproc->rproc = rproc; > core->rproc = rproc; > > + ret = k3_r5_rproc_request_mbox(rproc); > + if (ret) > + return ret; > + > ret = k3_r5_rproc_configure_mode(kproc); > if (ret < 0) > goto out; > @@ -1392,6 +1372,8 @@ static void k3_r5_cluster_rproc_exit(void *data) > } > } > > + mbox_free_channel(kproc->mbox); > + > rproc_del(rproc); > > k3_r5_reserved_mem_exit(kproc); > -- > 2.34.1 >
Hi Mathieu, On 14-08-2024 21:22, Mathieu Poirier wrote: > Hi Beleswar, On Thu, Aug 08, 2024 at 01: 11: 26PM +0530, Beleswar > Padhi wrote: > Acquire the mailbox handle during device probe and do > not release handle > in stop/detach routine or error paths. This > removes the redundant > requests for > ZjQcmQRYFpfptBannerStart > Report Suspicious > <https://us-phishalarm-ewt.proofpoint.com/EWT/v1/G3vK!vldnVV7DH2eSIoaksHjpMPogloWUPfAcp2-dEVbMoE1YA3kGFXdJXGAJUKJm$> > > ZjQcmQRYFpfptBannerEnd > Hi Beleswar, > > On Thu, Aug 08, 2024 at 01:11:26PM +0530, Beleswar Padhi wrote: > > Acquire the mailbox handle during device probe and do not release handle > > in stop/detach routine or error paths. This removes the redundant > > requests for mbox handle later during rproc start/attach. This also > > allows to defer remoteproc driver's probe if mailbox is not probed yet. > > > > Signed-off-by: Beleswar Padhi <b-padhi@ti.com> > > --- > > drivers/remoteproc/ti_k3_r5_remoteproc.c | 78 +++++++++--------------- > > 1 file changed, 30 insertions(+), 48 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/ti_k3_r5_remoteproc.c b/drivers/remoteproc/ti_k3_r5_remoteproc.c > > index 57067308b3c0..8a63a9360c0f 100644 > > --- a/drivers/remoteproc/ti_k3_r5_remoteproc.c > > +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/ti_k3_r5_remoteproc.c > > @@ -194,6 +194,10 @@ static void k3_r5_rproc_mbox_callback(struct mbox_client *client, void *data) > > const char *name = kproc->rproc->name; > > u32 msg = omap_mbox_message(data); > > > > + /* Do not forward message from a detached core */ > > + if (kproc->rproc->state == RPROC_DETACHED) > > + return; > > + > > dev_dbg(dev, "mbox msg: 0x%x\n", msg); > > > > switch (msg) { > > @@ -229,6 +233,10 @@ static void k3_r5_rproc_kick(struct rproc *rproc, int vqid) > > mbox_msg_t msg = (mbox_msg_t)vqid; > > int ret; > > > > + /* Do not forward message to a detached core */ > > + if (kproc->rproc->state == RPROC_DETACHED) > > + return; > > + > > /* send the index of the triggered virtqueue in the mailbox payload */ > > ret = mbox_send_message(kproc->mbox, (void *)msg); > > if (ret < 0) > > @@ -399,12 +407,9 @@ static int k3_r5_rproc_request_mbox(struct rproc *rproc) > > client->knows_txdone = false; > > > > kproc->mbox = mbox_request_channel(client, 0); > > - if (IS_ERR(kproc->mbox)) { > > - ret = -EBUSY; > > - dev_err(dev, "mbox_request_channel failed: %ld\n", > > - PTR_ERR(kproc->mbox)); > > - return ret; > > - } > > + if (IS_ERR(kproc->mbox)) > > + return dev_err_probe(dev, PTR_ERR(kproc->mbox), > > + "mbox_request_channel failed\n"); > > > > /* > > * Ping the remote processor, this is only for sanity-sake for now; > > @@ -552,10 +557,6 @@ static int k3_r5_rproc_start(struct rproc *rproc) > > u32 boot_addr; > > int ret; > > > > - ret = k3_r5_rproc_request_mbox(rproc); > > - if (ret) > > - return ret; > > - > > boot_addr = rproc->bootaddr; > > /* TODO: add boot_addr sanity checking */ > > dev_dbg(dev, "booting R5F core using boot addr = 0x%x\n", boot_addr); > > @@ -564,7 +565,7 @@ static int k3_r5_rproc_start(struct rproc *rproc) > > core = kproc->core; > > ret = ti_sci_proc_set_config(core->tsp, boot_addr, 0, 0); > > if (ret) > > - goto put_mbox; > > + return ret; > > > > /* unhalt/run all applicable cores */ > > if (cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_LOCKSTEP) { > > @@ -580,13 +581,12 @@ static int k3_r5_rproc_start(struct rproc *rproc) > > if (core != core0 && core0->rproc->state == RPROC_OFFLINE) { > > dev_err(dev, "%s: can not start core 1 before core 0\n", > > __func__); > > - ret = -EPERM; > > - goto put_mbox; > > + return -EPERM; > > } > > > > ret = k3_r5_core_run(core); > > if (ret) > > - goto put_mbox; > > + return ret; > > } > > > > return 0; > > @@ -596,8 +596,6 @@ static int k3_r5_rproc_start(struct rproc *rproc) > > if (k3_r5_core_halt(core)) > > dev_warn(core->dev, "core halt back failed\n"); > > } > > -put_mbox: > > - mbox_free_channel(kproc->mbox); > > return ret; > > } > > > > @@ -658,8 +656,6 @@ static int k3_r5_rproc_stop(struct rproc *rproc) > > goto out; > > } > > > > - mbox_free_channel(kproc->mbox); > > - > > return 0; > > > > unroll_core_halt: > > @@ -674,42 +670,22 @@ static int k3_r5_rproc_stop(struct rproc *rproc) > > /* > > * Attach to a running R5F remote processor (IPC-only mode) > > * > > - * The R5F attach callback only needs to request the mailbox, the remote > > - * processor is already booted, so there is no need to issue any TI-SCI > > - * commands to boot the R5F cores in IPC-only mode. This callback is invoked > > - * only in IPC-only mode. > > + * The R5F attach callback is a NOP. The remote processor is already booted, and > > + * all required resources have been acquired during probe routine, so there is > > + * no need to issue any TI-SCI commands to boot the R5F cores in IPC-only mode. > > + * This callback is invoked only in IPC-only mode and exists because > > + * rproc_validate() checks for its existence. > > Excellent documentation. Thanks! > > > */ > > -static int k3_r5_rproc_attach(struct rproc *rproc) > > -{ > > - struct k3_r5_rproc *kproc = rproc->priv; > > - struct device *dev = kproc->dev; > > - int ret; > > - > > - ret = k3_r5_rproc_request_mbox(rproc); > > - if (ret) > > - return ret; > > - > > - dev_info(dev, "R5F core initialized in IPC-only mode\n"); > > - return 0; > > -} > > +static int k3_r5_rproc_attach(struct rproc *rproc) { return 0; } > > > > /* > > * Detach from a running R5F remote processor (IPC-only mode) > > * > > - * The R5F detach callback performs the opposite operation to attach callback > > - * and only needs to release the mailbox, the R5F cores are not stopped and > > - * will be left in booted state in IPC-only mode. This callback is invoked > > - * only in IPC-only mode. > > + * The R5F detach callback is a NOP. The R5F cores are not stopped and will be > > + * left in booted state in IPC-only mode. This callback is invoked only in > > + * IPC-only mode and exists for sanity sake. > > I would add the part about detach() being a NOP to attach() above... > > > */ > > -static int k3_r5_rproc_detach(struct rproc *rproc) > > -{ > > - struct k3_r5_rproc *kproc = rproc->priv; > > - struct device *dev = kproc->dev; > > - > > - mbox_free_channel(kproc->mbox); > > - dev_info(dev, "R5F core deinitialized in IPC-only mode\n"); > > - return 0; > > -} > > +static int k3_r5_rproc_detach(struct rproc *rproc) { return 0; } > > ... and just remove this. Thanks for the comments. But dropping k3_r5_rproc_detach() would mean we would get -EINVAL[1] while trying to detach the core from sysfs[0]. Is it expected? [0]: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_sysfs.c#n202 [1]: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c#n1752 > > Otherwise this patch looks good. > > > > > /* > > * This function implements the .get_loaded_rsc_table() callback and is used > > @@ -1278,6 +1254,10 @@ static int k3_r5_cluster_rproc_init(struct platform_device *pdev) > > kproc->rproc = rproc; > > core->rproc = rproc; > > > > + ret = k3_r5_rproc_request_mbox(rproc); > > + if (ret) > > + return ret; > > + > > ret = k3_r5_rproc_configure_mode(kproc); > > if (ret < 0) > > goto out; > > @@ -1392,6 +1372,8 @@ static void k3_r5_cluster_rproc_exit(void *data) > > } > > } > > > > + mbox_free_channel(kproc->mbox); > > + > > rproc_del(rproc); > > > > k3_r5_reserved_mem_exit(kproc); > > -- > > 2.34.1 > >
On Fri, Aug 16, 2024 at 01:23:59PM +0530, Beleswar Prasad Padhi wrote: > Hi Mathieu, > > On 14-08-2024 21:22, Mathieu Poirier wrote: > > Hi Beleswar, On Thu, Aug 08, 2024 at 01: 11: 26PM +0530, Beleswar Padhi > > wrote: > Acquire the mailbox handle during device probe and do not > > release handle > in stop/detach routine or error paths. This removes the > > redundant > requests for > > ZjQcmQRYFpfptBannerStart > > Report Suspicious > > <https://us-phishalarm-ewt.proofpoint.com/EWT/v1/G3vK!vldnVV7DH2eSIoaksHjpMPogloWUPfAcp2-dEVbMoE1YA3kGFXdJXGAJUKJm$> > > > > ZjQcmQRYFpfptBannerEnd > > Hi Beleswar, > > > > On Thu, Aug 08, 2024 at 01:11:26PM +0530, Beleswar Padhi wrote: > > > Acquire the mailbox handle during device probe and do not release handle > > > in stop/detach routine or error paths. This removes the redundant > > > requests for mbox handle later during rproc start/attach. This also > > > allows to defer remoteproc driver's probe if mailbox is not probed yet. > > > > Signed-off-by: Beleswar Padhi <b-padhi@ti.com> > > > --- > > > drivers/remoteproc/ti_k3_r5_remoteproc.c | 78 +++++++++--------------- > > > 1 file changed, 30 insertions(+), 48 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/ti_k3_r5_remoteproc.c > > b/drivers/remoteproc/ti_k3_r5_remoteproc.c > > > index 57067308b3c0..8a63a9360c0f 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/remoteproc/ti_k3_r5_remoteproc.c > > > +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/ti_k3_r5_remoteproc.c > > > @@ -194,6 +194,10 @@ static void k3_r5_rproc_mbox_callback(struct mbox_client *client, void *data) > > > const char *name = kproc->rproc->name; > > > u32 msg = omap_mbox_message(data); > > > > + /* Do not forward message from a detached core */ > > > + if (kproc->rproc->state == RPROC_DETACHED) > > > + return; > > > + > > > dev_dbg(dev, "mbox msg: 0x%x\n", msg); > > > > switch (msg) { > > > @@ -229,6 +233,10 @@ static void k3_r5_rproc_kick(struct rproc *rproc, int vqid) > > > mbox_msg_t msg = (mbox_msg_t)vqid; > > > int ret; > > > > + /* Do not forward message to a detached core */ > > > + if (kproc->rproc->state == RPROC_DETACHED) > > > + return; > > > + > > > /* send the index of the triggered virtqueue in the mailbox payload */ > > > ret = mbox_send_message(kproc->mbox, (void *)msg); > > > if (ret < 0) > > > @@ -399,12 +407,9 @@ static int k3_r5_rproc_request_mbox(struct rproc *rproc) > > > client->knows_txdone = false; > > > > kproc->mbox = mbox_request_channel(client, 0); > > > - if (IS_ERR(kproc->mbox)) { > > > - ret = -EBUSY; > > > - dev_err(dev, "mbox_request_channel failed: %ld\n", > > > - PTR_ERR(kproc->mbox)); > > > - return ret; > > > - } > > > + if (IS_ERR(kproc->mbox)) > > > + return dev_err_probe(dev, PTR_ERR(kproc->mbox), > > > + "mbox_request_channel failed\n"); > > > > /* > > > * Ping the remote processor, this is only for sanity-sake for now; > > > @@ -552,10 +557,6 @@ static int k3_r5_rproc_start(struct rproc *rproc) > > > u32 boot_addr; > > > int ret; > > > > - ret = k3_r5_rproc_request_mbox(rproc); > > > - if (ret) > > > - return ret; > > > - > > > boot_addr = rproc->bootaddr; > > > /* TODO: add boot_addr sanity checking */ > > > dev_dbg(dev, "booting R5F core using boot addr = 0x%x\n", boot_addr); > > > @@ -564,7 +565,7 @@ static int k3_r5_rproc_start(struct rproc *rproc) > > > core = kproc->core; > > > ret = ti_sci_proc_set_config(core->tsp, boot_addr, 0, 0); > > > if (ret) > > > - goto put_mbox; > > > + return ret; > > > > /* unhalt/run all applicable cores */ > > > if (cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_LOCKSTEP) { > > > @@ -580,13 +581,12 @@ static int k3_r5_rproc_start(struct rproc *rproc) > > > if (core != core0 && core0->rproc->state == RPROC_OFFLINE) { > > > dev_err(dev, "%s: can not start core 1 before core 0\n", > > > __func__); > > > - ret = -EPERM; > > > - goto put_mbox; > > > + return -EPERM; > > > } > > > > ret = k3_r5_core_run(core); > > > if (ret) > > > - goto put_mbox; > > > + return ret; > > > } > > > > return 0; > > > @@ -596,8 +596,6 @@ static int k3_r5_rproc_start(struct rproc *rproc) > > > if (k3_r5_core_halt(core)) > > > dev_warn(core->dev, "core halt back failed\n"); > > > } > > > -put_mbox: > > > - mbox_free_channel(kproc->mbox); > > > return ret; > > > } > > > > @@ -658,8 +656,6 @@ static int k3_r5_rproc_stop(struct rproc > > *rproc) > > > goto out; > > > } > > > > - mbox_free_channel(kproc->mbox); > > > - > > > return 0; > > > > unroll_core_halt: > > > @@ -674,42 +670,22 @@ static int k3_r5_rproc_stop(struct rproc *rproc) > > > /* > > > * Attach to a running R5F remote processor (IPC-only mode) > > > * > > > - * The R5F attach callback only needs to request the mailbox, the remote > > > - * processor is already booted, so there is no need to issue any TI-SCI > > > - * commands to boot the R5F cores in IPC-only mode. This callback is invoked > > > - * only in IPC-only mode. > > > + * The R5F attach callback is a NOP. The remote processor is already booted, and > > > + * all required resources have been acquired during probe routine, so there is > > > + * no need to issue any TI-SCI commands to boot the R5F cores in IPC-only mode. > > > + * This callback is invoked only in IPC-only mode and exists because > > > + * rproc_validate() checks for its existence. > > > > Excellent documentation. > > > Thanks! > > > > > > */ > > > -static int k3_r5_rproc_attach(struct rproc *rproc) > > > -{ > > > - struct k3_r5_rproc *kproc = rproc->priv; > > > - struct device *dev = kproc->dev; > > > - int ret; > > > - > > > - ret = k3_r5_rproc_request_mbox(rproc); > > > - if (ret) > > > - return ret; > > > - > > > - dev_info(dev, "R5F core initialized in IPC-only mode\n"); > > > - return 0; > > > -} > > > +static int k3_r5_rproc_attach(struct rproc *rproc) { return 0; } > > > > /* > > > * Detach from a running R5F remote processor (IPC-only mode) > > > * > > > - * The R5F detach callback performs the opposite operation to attach callback > > > - * and only needs to release the mailbox, the R5F cores are not stopped and > > > - * will be left in booted state in IPC-only mode. This callback is invoked > > > - * only in IPC-only mode. > > > + * The R5F detach callback is a NOP. The R5F cores are not stopped and will be > > > + * left in booted state in IPC-only mode. This callback is invoked only in > > > + * IPC-only mode and exists for sanity sake. > > > > I would add the part about detach() being a NOP to attach() above... > > > > > */ > > > -static int k3_r5_rproc_detach(struct rproc *rproc) > > > -{ > > > - struct k3_r5_rproc *kproc = rproc->priv; > > > - struct device *dev = kproc->dev; > > > - > > > - mbox_free_channel(kproc->mbox); > > > - dev_info(dev, "R5F core deinitialized in IPC-only mode\n"); > > > - return 0; > > > -} > > > +static int k3_r5_rproc_detach(struct rproc *rproc) { return 0; } > > > > ... and just remove this. > > > Thanks for the comments. But dropping k3_r5_rproc_detach() would mean we > would get -EINVAL[1] while trying to detach the core from sysfs[0]. Is it > expected? > You are correct. I have applied your patch. > [0]: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_sysfs.c#n202 > [1]: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c#n1752 > > > > > Otherwise this patch looks good. > > > > > > /* > > > * This function implements the .get_loaded_rsc_table() callback and is used > > > @@ -1278,6 +1254,10 @@ static int k3_r5_cluster_rproc_init(struct platform_device *pdev) > > > kproc->rproc = rproc; > > > core->rproc = rproc; > > > > + ret = k3_r5_rproc_request_mbox(rproc); > > > + if (ret) > > > + return ret; > > > + > > > ret = k3_r5_rproc_configure_mode(kproc); > > > if (ret < 0) > > > goto out; > > > @@ -1392,6 +1372,8 @@ static void k3_r5_cluster_rproc_exit(void *data) > > > } > > > } > > > > + mbox_free_channel(kproc->mbox); > > > + > > > rproc_del(rproc); > > > > k3_r5_reserved_mem_exit(kproc); > > > -- > 2.34.1 > > >
diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/ti_k3_r5_remoteproc.c b/drivers/remoteproc/ti_k3_r5_remoteproc.c index 57067308b3c0..8a63a9360c0f 100644 --- a/drivers/remoteproc/ti_k3_r5_remoteproc.c +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/ti_k3_r5_remoteproc.c @@ -194,6 +194,10 @@ static void k3_r5_rproc_mbox_callback(struct mbox_client *client, void *data) const char *name = kproc->rproc->name; u32 msg = omap_mbox_message(data); + /* Do not forward message from a detached core */ + if (kproc->rproc->state == RPROC_DETACHED) + return; + dev_dbg(dev, "mbox msg: 0x%x\n", msg); switch (msg) { @@ -229,6 +233,10 @@ static void k3_r5_rproc_kick(struct rproc *rproc, int vqid) mbox_msg_t msg = (mbox_msg_t)vqid; int ret; + /* Do not forward message to a detached core */ + if (kproc->rproc->state == RPROC_DETACHED) + return; + /* send the index of the triggered virtqueue in the mailbox payload */ ret = mbox_send_message(kproc->mbox, (void *)msg); if (ret < 0) @@ -399,12 +407,9 @@ static int k3_r5_rproc_request_mbox(struct rproc *rproc) client->knows_txdone = false; kproc->mbox = mbox_request_channel(client, 0); - if (IS_ERR(kproc->mbox)) { - ret = -EBUSY; - dev_err(dev, "mbox_request_channel failed: %ld\n", - PTR_ERR(kproc->mbox)); - return ret; - } + if (IS_ERR(kproc->mbox)) + return dev_err_probe(dev, PTR_ERR(kproc->mbox), + "mbox_request_channel failed\n"); /* * Ping the remote processor, this is only for sanity-sake for now; @@ -552,10 +557,6 @@ static int k3_r5_rproc_start(struct rproc *rproc) u32 boot_addr; int ret; - ret = k3_r5_rproc_request_mbox(rproc); - if (ret) - return ret; - boot_addr = rproc->bootaddr; /* TODO: add boot_addr sanity checking */ dev_dbg(dev, "booting R5F core using boot addr = 0x%x\n", boot_addr); @@ -564,7 +565,7 @@ static int k3_r5_rproc_start(struct rproc *rproc) core = kproc->core; ret = ti_sci_proc_set_config(core->tsp, boot_addr, 0, 0); if (ret) - goto put_mbox; + return ret; /* unhalt/run all applicable cores */ if (cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_LOCKSTEP) { @@ -580,13 +581,12 @@ static int k3_r5_rproc_start(struct rproc *rproc) if (core != core0 && core0->rproc->state == RPROC_OFFLINE) { dev_err(dev, "%s: can not start core 1 before core 0\n", __func__); - ret = -EPERM; - goto put_mbox; + return -EPERM; } ret = k3_r5_core_run(core); if (ret) - goto put_mbox; + return ret; } return 0; @@ -596,8 +596,6 @@ static int k3_r5_rproc_start(struct rproc *rproc) if (k3_r5_core_halt(core)) dev_warn(core->dev, "core halt back failed\n"); } -put_mbox: - mbox_free_channel(kproc->mbox); return ret; } @@ -658,8 +656,6 @@ static int k3_r5_rproc_stop(struct rproc *rproc) goto out; } - mbox_free_channel(kproc->mbox); - return 0; unroll_core_halt: @@ -674,42 +670,22 @@ static int k3_r5_rproc_stop(struct rproc *rproc) /* * Attach to a running R5F remote processor (IPC-only mode) * - * The R5F attach callback only needs to request the mailbox, the remote - * processor is already booted, so there is no need to issue any TI-SCI - * commands to boot the R5F cores in IPC-only mode. This callback is invoked - * only in IPC-only mode. + * The R5F attach callback is a NOP. The remote processor is already booted, and + * all required resources have been acquired during probe routine, so there is + * no need to issue any TI-SCI commands to boot the R5F cores in IPC-only mode. + * This callback is invoked only in IPC-only mode and exists because + * rproc_validate() checks for its existence. */ -static int k3_r5_rproc_attach(struct rproc *rproc) -{ - struct k3_r5_rproc *kproc = rproc->priv; - struct device *dev = kproc->dev; - int ret; - - ret = k3_r5_rproc_request_mbox(rproc); - if (ret) - return ret; - - dev_info(dev, "R5F core initialized in IPC-only mode\n"); - return 0; -} +static int k3_r5_rproc_attach(struct rproc *rproc) { return 0; } /* * Detach from a running R5F remote processor (IPC-only mode) * - * The R5F detach callback performs the opposite operation to attach callback - * and only needs to release the mailbox, the R5F cores are not stopped and - * will be left in booted state in IPC-only mode. This callback is invoked - * only in IPC-only mode. + * The R5F detach callback is a NOP. The R5F cores are not stopped and will be + * left in booted state in IPC-only mode. This callback is invoked only in + * IPC-only mode and exists for sanity sake. */ -static int k3_r5_rproc_detach(struct rproc *rproc) -{ - struct k3_r5_rproc *kproc = rproc->priv; - struct device *dev = kproc->dev; - - mbox_free_channel(kproc->mbox); - dev_info(dev, "R5F core deinitialized in IPC-only mode\n"); - return 0; -} +static int k3_r5_rproc_detach(struct rproc *rproc) { return 0; } /* * This function implements the .get_loaded_rsc_table() callback and is used @@ -1278,6 +1254,10 @@ static int k3_r5_cluster_rproc_init(struct platform_device *pdev) kproc->rproc = rproc; core->rproc = rproc; + ret = k3_r5_rproc_request_mbox(rproc); + if (ret) + return ret; + ret = k3_r5_rproc_configure_mode(kproc); if (ret < 0) goto out; @@ -1392,6 +1372,8 @@ static void k3_r5_cluster_rproc_exit(void *data) } } + mbox_free_channel(kproc->mbox); + rproc_del(rproc); k3_r5_reserved_mem_exit(kproc);
Acquire the mailbox handle during device probe and do not release handle in stop/detach routine or error paths. This removes the redundant requests for mbox handle later during rproc start/attach. This also allows to defer remoteproc driver's probe if mailbox is not probed yet. Signed-off-by: Beleswar Padhi <b-padhi@ti.com> --- drivers/remoteproc/ti_k3_r5_remoteproc.c | 78 +++++++++--------------- 1 file changed, 30 insertions(+), 48 deletions(-)