On Mon, 5 Oct 2020, Ben Levinsky wrote:
> R5 is included in Xilinx Zynq UltraScale MPSoC so by adding this
> remotproc driver, we can boot the R5 sub-system in different 2
> configurations -
> * split
> * lock-step
>
> The Xilinx R5 Remoteproc Driver boots the R5's via calls to the Xilinx
> Platform Management Unit that handles the R5 configuration, memory access
> and R5 lifecycle management. The interface to this manager is done in this
> driver via zynqmp_pm_* function calls.
Mostly minor comments left
> Signed-off-by: Wendy Liang <wendy.liang@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Michal Simek <michal.simek@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Ed Mooring <ed.mooring@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Jason Wu <j.wu@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Ben Levinsky <ben.levinsky@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> v2:
> - remove domain struct as per review from Mathieu
> v3:
> - add xilinx-related platform mgmt fn's instead of wrapping around
> function pointer in xilinx eemi ops struct
> v4:
> - add default values for enums
> - fix formatting as per checkpatch.pl --strict. Note that 1 warning and 1 check
> are still raised as each is due to fixing the warning results in that
> particular line going over 80 characters.
> v5:
> - parse_fw change from use of rproc_of_resm_mem_entry_init to
> rproc_mem_entry_init and use of alloc/release
> - var's of type zynqmp_r5_pdata all have same local variable name
> - use dev_dbg instead of dev_info
> v6:
> - adding memory carveouts is handled much more similarly. All mem
> carveouts are
> now described in reserved memory as needed. That is, TCM nodes are not
> coupled to remoteproc anymore. This is reflected in the remoteproc R5
> driver
> and the device tree binding.
> - remove mailbox from device tree binding as it is not necessary for elf
> loading
> - use lockstep-mode property for configuring RPU
> v7:
> - remove unused headers
> - change u32 *lockstep_mode -> u32 lockstep_mode;
> - change device-tree binding "lockstep-mode" to xlnx,cluster-mode
> - remove zynqmp_r5_mem_probe and loop to Probe R5 memory devices at
> remoteproc-probe time
> - remove is_r5_mode_set from zynqmp rpu remote processor private data
> - do not error out if no mailbox is provided
> - remove zynqmp_r5_remoteproc_probe call of platform_set_drvdata as
> pdata is
> handled in zynqmp_r5_remoteproc_remove
> v8:
> - remove old acks, reviewed-by's in commit message
> v9:
> - as mboxes are now optional, if pdata->tx_mc_skbs not initialized then
> do not call skb_queue_empty
> - update usage for zynqmp_pm_set_rpu_mode, zynqmp_pm_set_tcm_config and
> zynqmp_pm_get_rpu_mode
> - update 5/5 patch commit message to document supported configurations
> and how they are booted by the driver.
> - remove copyrights other than SPDX from zynqmp_r5_remoteproc.c
> - compilation warnings no longer raised
> - remove unused includes from zynqmp_r5_remoteproc.c
> - remove unused var autoboot from zynqmp_r5_remoteproc.c
> - reorder zynqmp_r5_pdata fpr small mem savings due to alignment
> - use of zynqmp_pm_set_tcm_config now does not have
> output arg
> - in tcm handling, unconditionally use &= 0x000fffff mask since all nodes
> in this fn are for tcm
> - update comments for translating dma field in tcm handling to device
> address
> - update calls to rproc_mem_entry_init in parse_mem_regions so that there
> are only 2 cases for types of carveouts instead of 3
> - in parse_mem_regions, check if device tree node is null before using it
> - add example device tree nodes used in parse_mem_regions and tcm parsing
> - add comment for vring id node length
> - add check for string length so that vring id is at least min length
> - move tcm nodes from reserved mem to instead own device tree nodes
> and only use them if enabled in device tree
> - add comment for explaining handling of rproc_elf_load_rsc_table
> - remove obsolete check for "if (vqid < 0)" in zynqmp_r5_rproc_kick
> - remove unused field mems in struct zynqmp_r5_pdata
> - remove call to zynqmp_r5_mem_probe and the fn itself as tcm handling
> is done by zyqmp_r5_pm_request_tcm
> - remove obsolete setting of dma_ops and parent device dma_mask
> - remove obsolete use of of_dma_configure
> - add comment for call to r5_set_mode fn
> - make mbox usage optional and gracefully inform user via dev_dbg if not
> present
> - change var lockstep_mode from u32* to u32
> v11:
> - use enums instead of u32 where possible in zynqmp_r5_remoteproc
> - update usage of zynqmp_pm_set/get_rpu_mode and zynqmp_pm_set_tcm_config
> - update prints to not use carriage return, just newline
> - look up tcm banks via property in r5 node instead of string name
> - print device tree nodes with %pOF instead of %s with node name field
> - update tcm release to unmap VA
> - handle r5-1 use case
> v12:
> - update signed off by so that latest developer name is last
> - do not cast enums to u32s for zynqmp_pm* functions
> v14:
> - change zynqmp_r5_remoteproc::rpus and rpu_mode to static
> - fix typo
> - zynqmp_r5_remoteproc::r5_set_mode set rpu mode from
> property specified in device tree
> - use u32 instead of u32* to store in remoteproc memory entry private data
> for pnode_id information
> - always call r5_set_mode on probe
> - remove alloc of zynqmp_r5_pdata in
> zynqmp_r5_remoteproc::zynqmp_r5_remoteproc_probe as there is static
> allocation already
> - error at probe time if lockstep-mode property not present in device tree
> - update commit message as per review
> - remove dependency on MAILBOX in makefile as ZYNQMP_IPI_MBOX is present
> - remove unused macros
> - update comment ordering of zynqmp_r5_pdata to match struct definition
> - zynqmp_r5_remoteproc::tcm_mem_release error if pnode id is invalid
> - remove obsolete TODOs
> - only call zynqmp_r5_remoteproc::zynqmp_r5_probe if the index is valid
> - remove uneven dev_dbg/dev_err fn calls
> v15:
> - if lockstep mode prop is present, then RPU cluster is in lockstep mode.
> if not present, cluster is in split mode.
> - if 2 RPUs provided but one is lockstep then error out as this is invalid
> configuration
> v16:
> - replace of_get_property(dev->of_node, "lockstep-mode" with
> of_property_read_bool
> - propagate rpu mode specified in device tree through functions instead
> of holding a global, static var
> - check child remoteproc nodes via of_get_available_child_count before
> looping through children
> - replace check of "pdata->pnode_id == 0" instead by checking rpu's
> zynqmp_r5_pdata* if NULL
> - remove old, obsolete checks for dma_pools in zynqmp_r5_remoteproc_remove
> - change rpus from zynqmp_r5_pdata[] to zynqmp_r5_pdata*[] so that
> check for pdata->pnode_id == 0 is not needed
> v17:
> - fix style as per kernel test bot
> v18:
> - to more closely mimic other remoteproc drivers, change zynqmp r5 rproc
> data from zynqmp_r5_pdata to zynqmp_r5_rproc and pdata local var to
> zproc
> - remove global vars rpus and rpu_mode
> - instantiate device for zynqmp r5 rproc from device set by rproc_alloc
> - fix typos
> - update to call zynqmp_r5_release from the rproc_alloc-related device and
> remove the instantiated device from zynqmp_r5_probe
> - remove unneeded call to platform_set_drvdata
> - remove driver remove function, as the clean up is handled in release
> - remove while (!skb_queue_empty loop and mbox_free_channel calls in
> zynqmp_r5_release, and mbox_free_channel
> - remove device_unregister call in zynqmp_r5_release
> - remove kzalloc for pdata (what is now called z_rproc)
> - update conditional in loop to calls of zynqmp_r5_probe
>
> ---
> drivers/remoteproc/Kconfig | 8 +
> drivers/remoteproc/Makefile | 1 +
> drivers/remoteproc/zynqmp_r5_remoteproc.c | 707 ++++++++++++++++++++++
> 3 files changed, 716 insertions(+)
> create mode 100644 drivers/remoteproc/zynqmp_r5_remoteproc.c
>
> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/Kconfig b/drivers/remoteproc/Kconfig
> index c6659dfea7c7..68e567c5375c 100644
> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/Kconfig
> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/Kconfig
> @@ -275,6 +275,14 @@ config TI_K3_DSP_REMOTEPROC
> It's safe to say N here if you're not interested in utilizing
> the DSP slave processors.
>
> +config ZYNQMP_R5_REMOTEPROC
> + tristate "ZynqMP_R5 remoteproc support"
> + depends on PM && ARCH_ZYNQMP
> + select RPMSG_VIRTIO
> + select ZYNQMP_IPI_MBOX
> + help
> + Say y or m here to support ZynqMP R5 remote processors via the remote
> + processor framework.
> endif # REMOTEPROC
>
> endmenu
> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/Makefile b/drivers/remoteproc/Makefile
> index 3dfa28e6c701..ef1abff654c2 100644
> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/Makefile
> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/Makefile
> @@ -33,3 +33,4 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_ST_REMOTEPROC) += st_remoteproc.o
> obj-$(CONFIG_ST_SLIM_REMOTEPROC) += st_slim_rproc.o
> obj-$(CONFIG_STM32_RPROC) += stm32_rproc.o
> obj-$(CONFIG_TI_K3_DSP_REMOTEPROC) += ti_k3_dsp_remoteproc.o
> +obj-$(CONFIG_ZYNQMP_R5_REMOTEPROC) += zynqmp_r5_remoteproc.o
> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/zynqmp_r5_remoteproc.c b/drivers/remoteproc/zynqmp_r5_remoteproc.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 000000000000..37bd76252ff2
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/zynqmp_r5_remoteproc.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,707 @@
> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> +/*
> + * Zynq R5 Remote Processor driver
> + *
> + * Based on origin OMAP and Zynq Remote Processor driver
> + *
> + */
> +
> +#include <linux/firmware/xlnx-zynqmp.h>
> +#include <linux/interrupt.h>
> +#include <linux/kernel.h>
> +#include <linux/list.h>
> +#include <linux/mailbox_client.h>
> +#include <linux/mailbox/zynqmp-ipi-message.h>
> +#include <linux/module.h>
> +#include <linux/of_address.h>
> +#include <linux/of_platform.h>
> +#include <linux/of_reserved_mem.h>
> +#include <linux/platform_device.h>
> +#include <linux/remoteproc.h>
> +#include <linux/skbuff.h>
> +#include <linux/sysfs.h>
> +
> +#include "remoteproc_internal.h"
> +
> +#define MAX_RPROCS 2 /* Support up to 2 RPU */
> +#define MAX_MEM_PNODES 4 /* Max power nodes for one RPU memory instance */
> +
> +#define BANK_LIST_PROP "meta-memory-regions"
> +
> +/* IPI buffer MAX length */
> +#define IPI_BUF_LEN_MAX 32U
> +/* RX mailbox client buffer max length */
> +#define RX_MBOX_CLIENT_BUF_MAX (IPI_BUF_LEN_MAX + \
> + sizeof(struct zynqmp_ipi_message))
> +
> +/**
> + * struct zynqmp_r5_mem - zynqmp rpu memory data
> + * @pnode_id: TCM power domain ids
> + * @res: memory resource
> + * @node: list node
> + */
> +struct zynqmp_r5_mem {
> + u32 pnode_id[MAX_MEM_PNODES];
> + struct resource res;
> + struct list_head node;
> +};
> +
> +/**
> + * struct zynqmp_r5_rproc - zynqmp rpu remote processor state
> + * @rx_mc_buf: rx mailbox client buffer to save the rx message
> + * @tx_mc: tx mailbox client
> + * @rx_mc: rx mailbox client * @dev: device of RPU instance
> + * @mbox_work: mbox_work for the RPU remoteproc
> + * @tx_mc_skbs: socket buffers for tx mailbox client
> + * @dev: device of RPU instance
> + * @rproc: rproc handle
> + * @tx_chan: tx mailbox channel
> + * @rx_chan: rx mailbox channel
> + * @pnode_id: RPU CPU power domain id
> + */
> +struct zynqmp_r5_rproc {
> + unsigned char rx_mc_buf[RX_MBOX_CLIENT_BUF_MAX];
> + struct mbox_client tx_mc;
> + struct mbox_client rx_mc;
> + struct work_struct mbox_work;
> + struct sk_buff_head tx_mc_skbs;
> + struct device dev;
> + struct rproc *rproc;
> + struct mbox_chan *tx_chan;
> + struct mbox_chan *rx_chan;
> + u32 pnode_id;
> +};
> +
> +/*
> + * r5_set_mode - set RPU operation mode
> + * @z_rproc: Remote processor private data
> + *
> + * set RPU operation mode
> + *
> + * Return: 0 for success, negative value for failure
> + */
> +static int r5_set_mode(struct zynqmp_r5_rproc *z_rproc,
> + enum rpu_oper_mode rpu_mode)
> +{
> + enum rpu_tcm_comb tcm_mode;
> + enum rpu_oper_mode cur_rpu_mode;
> + int ret;
> +
> + ret = zynqmp_pm_get_rpu_mode(z_rproc->pnode_id, &cur_rpu_mode);
> + if (ret < 0)
> + return ret;
> +
> + if (rpu_mode != cur_rpu_mode) {
> + ret = zynqmp_pm_set_rpu_mode(z_rproc->pnode_id,
> + rpu_mode);
> + if (ret < 0)
> + return ret;
> + }
> +
> + tcm_mode = (rpu_mode == PM_RPU_MODE_LOCKSTEP) ?
> + PM_RPU_TCM_COMB : PM_RPU_TCM_SPLIT;
> + return zynqmp_pm_set_tcm_config(z_rproc->pnode_id, tcm_mode);
> +}
> +
> +/*
> + * ZynqMP R5 remoteproc memory release function
> + */
> +static int tcm_mem_release(struct rproc *rproc, struct rproc_mem_entry *mem)
> +{
> + u32 pnode_id = (u64)mem->priv;
> +
> + if (pnode_id <= 0)
pnode_id is a u32, so checks for it to be negative don't make a lot of
sense
> + return -EINVAL;
> +
> + iounmap(mem->va);
> + return zynqmp_pm_release_node(pnode_id);
> +}
> +
> +/*
> + * ZynqMP R5 remoteproc operations
> + */
> +static int zynqmp_r5_rproc_start(struct rproc *rproc)
> +{
> + struct device *dev = rproc->dev.parent;
> + struct zynqmp_r5_rproc *z_rproc = rproc->priv;
> + enum rpu_boot_mem bootmem;
> +
> + bootmem = (rproc->bootaddr & 0xF0000000) == 0xF0000000 ?
> + PM_RPU_BOOTMEM_HIVEC : PM_RPU_BOOTMEM_LOVEC;
> +
> + dev_dbg(dev, "RPU boot from %s.",
> + bootmem == PM_RPU_BOOTMEM_HIVEC ? "OCM" : "TCM");
> +
> + return zynqmp_pm_request_wake(z_rproc->pnode_id, 1,
> + bootmem, ZYNQMP_PM_REQUEST_ACK_NO);
> +}
> +
> +static int zynqmp_r5_rproc_stop(struct rproc *rproc)
> +{
> + struct zynqmp_r5_rproc *z_rproc = rproc->priv;
> + struct sk_buff *skb;
> +
> + if (z_rproc->tx_chan)
> + mbox_free_channel(z_rproc->tx_chan);
> + if (z_rproc->rx_chan)
> + mbox_free_channel(z_rproc->rx_chan);
> +
> + return zynqmp_pm_force_pwrdwn(z_rproc->pnode_id,
> + ZYNQMP_PM_REQUEST_ACK_BLOCKING);
> +}
> +
> +static int zynqmp_r5_rproc_mem_alloc(struct rproc *rproc,
> + struct rproc_mem_entry *mem)
> +{
> + void *va;
> +
> + va = ioremap_wc(mem->dma, mem->len);
> + if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(va))
> + return -ENOMEM;
> +
> + /* Update memory entry va */
> + mem->va = va;
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int zynqmp_r5_rproc_mem_release(struct rproc *rproc,
> + struct rproc_mem_entry *mem)
> +{
> + iounmap(mem->va);
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int parse_mem_regions(struct rproc *rproc)
> +{
> + int num_mems, i;
> + struct zynqmp_r5_rproc *z_rproc = rproc->priv;
> + struct device *dev = &z_rproc->dev;
> + struct device_node *np = dev->of_node;
> + struct rproc_mem_entry *mem;
> +
> + num_mems = of_count_phandle_with_args(np, "memory-region", NULL);
> + if (num_mems <= 0)
> + return 0;
> +
> + for (i = 0; i < num_mems; i++) {
> + struct device_node *node;
> + struct reserved_mem *rmem;
> +
> + node = of_parse_phandle(np, "memory-region", i);
> + if (!node)
> + return -EINVAL;
> +
> + rmem = of_reserved_mem_lookup(node);
> + if (!rmem)
> + return -EINVAL;
> +
> + if (strstr(node->name, "vdev0vring")) {
> + int vring_id;
> + char name[16];
> +
> + /*
> + * expecting form of "rpuXvdev0vringX as documented
> + * in xilinx remoteproc device tree binding
> + */
> + if (strlen(node->name) < 14) {
> + dev_err(dev, "%pOF is less than 14 chars",
> + node);
> + return -EINVAL;
> + }
> +
> + /*
> + * can be 1 of multiple vring IDs per IPC channel
> + * e.g. 'vdev0vring0' and 'vdev0vring1'
> + */
> + vring_id = node->name[14] - '0';
If you are going to use a direct access to node->name[14], then the
strlen check above should cover it, which means we should check for at
least strlen(node->name) < 15.
> + snprintf(name, sizeof(name), "vdev0vring%d", vring_id);
> + /* Register vring */
> + mem = rproc_mem_entry_init(dev, NULL,
> + (dma_addr_t)rmem->base,
> + rmem->size, rmem->base,
> + zynqmp_r5_rproc_mem_alloc,
> + zynqmp_r5_rproc_mem_release,
> + name);
> + } else {
> + /* Register DMA region */
> + int (*alloc)(struct rproc *r,
> + struct rproc_mem_entry *rme);
> + int (*release)(struct rproc *r,
> + struct rproc_mem_entry *rme);
> + char name[20];
> +
> + if (strstr(node->name, "vdev0buffer")) {
> + alloc = NULL;
> + release = NULL;
> + strcpy(name, "vdev0buffer");
> + } else {
> + alloc = zynqmp_r5_rproc_mem_alloc;
> + release = zynqmp_r5_rproc_mem_release;
> + strcpy(name, node->name);
> + }
> +
> + mem = rproc_mem_entry_init(dev, NULL,
> + (dma_addr_t)rmem->base,
> + rmem->size, rmem->base,
> + alloc, release, name);
> + }
> + if (!mem)
> + return -ENOMEM;
> +
> + rproc_add_carveout(rproc, mem);
> + }
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +/* call Xilinx Platform manager to request access to TCM bank */
> +static int zynqmp_r5_pm_request_tcm(struct device_node *tcm_node,
> + struct device *dev, u32 *pnode_id)
> +{
> + int ret;
> +
> + ret = of_property_read_u32(tcm_node, "pnode-id", pnode_id);
> + if (ret)
> + return ret;
> +
> + return zynqmp_pm_request_node(*pnode_id, ZYNQMP_PM_CAPABILITY_ACCESS, 0,
> + ZYNQMP_PM_REQUEST_ACK_BLOCKING);
> +}
> +
> +/* Given tcm bank entry,
I think checkpatch.pl would complain for this comment format
> + * this callback will set device address for R5 running on TCM
> + * and also setup virtual address for tcm bank remoteproc carveout
> + */
> +static int tcm_mem_alloc(struct rproc *rproc,
> + struct rproc_mem_entry *mem)
> +{
> + void *va;
> + struct device *dev = rproc->dev.parent;
> +
> + va = ioremap_wc(mem->dma, mem->len);
> + if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(va))
> + return -ENOMEM;
> +
> + /* Update memory entry va */
> + mem->va = va;
> +
> + va = devm_ioremap_wc(dev, mem->da, mem->len);
> + if (!va)
> + return -ENOMEM;
> + /* As R5 is 32 bit, wipe out extra high bits */
> + mem->da &= 0x000fffff;
> + /*
> + * handle tcm banks 1 a and b (0xffe90000 and oxffeb0000)
> + * As both of these the only common bit found not in tcm bank0 a or b
> + * is at 0x80000 use this mask to suss it out
> + */
> + if (mem->da & 0x80000)
> + /*
> + * need to do more to further translate
> + * tcm banks 1a and 1b at 0xffe90000 and oxffeb0000
^typo
> + * respectively to 0x0 and 0x20000
> + */
> + mem->da -= 0x90000;
I understand now why we do "mem->da -= 0x90000" and the in-code comment
explains it. However, why the "if (mem->da & 0x80000)" check?
If we want to make sure to do this "translation" only for 0xffe90000 and
0xffeb0000, wouldn't it be better to call them out explicitly, like:
if (mem->da == 0x90000 || mem->da == 0xB0000)
Also if this if check fails, should we print an error? Or is it a
possible handled condition?
