Hi,
the error handling below looks odd.
Le 03/08/2022 à 16:21, Srinivasa Rao Mandadapu a écrit :
Add memory sandbox support for ADSP based platforms secure booting.
Signed-off-by: Srinivasa Rao Mandadapu <quic_srivasam-jfJNa2p1gH1BDgjK7y7TUQ@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/remoteproc/qcom_q6v5_adsp.c | 101 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
1 file changed, 99 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/qcom_q6v5_adsp.c b/drivers/remoteproc/qcom_q6v5_adsp.c
index 3dbd035..f81da47 100644
--- a/drivers/remoteproc/qcom_q6v5_adsp.c
+++ b/drivers/remoteproc/qcom_q6v5_adsp.c
static int adsp_start(struct rproc *rproc)
{
struct qcom_adsp *adsp = (struct qcom_adsp *)rproc->priv;
@@ -341,7 +429,13 @@ static int adsp_start(struct rproc *rproc)
ret = qcom_q6v5_prepare(&adsp->q6v5);
if (ret)
return ret;
-
+ if (!adsp->is_wpss) {
+ ret = adsp_map_smmu(adsp, rproc);
+ if (ret) {
+ dev_err(adsp->dev, "ADSP smmu mapping failed\n");
+ goto adsp_smmu_unmap;
goto disable_irqs;?
+ }
+ }
ret = clk_prepare_enable(adsp->xo);
if (ret)
goto disable_irqs;
goto adsp_smmu_unmap;?
@@ -402,6 +496,9 @@ static int adsp_start(struct rproc *rproc)
clk_disable_unprepare(adsp->xo);
disable_irqs:
qcom_q6v5_unprepare(&adsp->q6v5);
+adsp_smmu_unmap:
+ iommu_unmap(adsp->iommu_dom, adsp->mem_phys, adsp->mem_size);
+ iommu_domain_free(adsp->iommu_dom);
Should this new hunk be above disable_irqs?
And I think that it should be guardd with a "if (!adsp->is_wpss)".
CJ
return ret;
}
