On Wed, Jun 08, 2022 at 04:35:48PM +0800, Tinghan Shen wrote: > The mtk_scp.c driver only supports the single core SCP and the > 1st core of a dual-core SCP. This patch extends it for the 2nd core. > > MT8195 SCP is a dual-core MCU. Both cores are housed in the same subsys. s/subsys/subsystem > They have the same viewpoint of registers and memory. > > Core 1 of the SCP features its own set of core configuration registers, > interrupt controller, timers, and DMAs. The rest of the peripherals > in this subsystem are shared by core 0 and core 1. > > As for memory, core 1 has its own cache memory. the SCP SRAM is shared /the/The > by core 0 and core 1. > > Signed-off-by: Tinghan Shen <tinghan.shen@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > --- > drivers/remoteproc/mtk_scp.c | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++-- > 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/mtk_scp.c b/drivers/remoteproc/mtk_scp.c > index 3510c6d0bbc8..91b4aefde4ac 100644 > --- a/drivers/remoteproc/mtk_scp.c > +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/mtk_scp.c > @@ -23,6 +23,10 @@ > #define MAX_CODE_SIZE 0x500000 > #define SECTION_NAME_IPI_BUFFER ".ipi_buffer" > > +#define SCP_CORE_0 0 > +#define SCP_CORE_1 1 > +#define SCP_CORE_SINGLE 0xF > + > /** > * scp_get() - get a reference to SCP. > * > @@ -836,6 +840,7 @@ static int scp_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > struct resource *res; > const char *fw_name = "scp.img"; > int ret, i; > + u32 core_id = SCP_CORE_SINGLE; > > ret = rproc_of_parse_firmware(dev, 0, &fw_name); > if (ret < 0 && ret != -EINVAL) > @@ -851,8 +856,16 @@ static int scp_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > scp->data = of_device_get_match_data(dev); > platform_set_drvdata(pdev, scp); > > + ret = of_property_read_u32_index(dev->of_node, "mediatek,scp-core", 1, &core_id); > + if (ret == 0) > + dev_info(dev, "Boot SCP dual core %u\n", core_id); Why is the DT property "mediatek,scp-core" needed at all? Since the compatible "mediatek,mt8195-scp-dual" has already been defined previously in this patchset, initialising the second core, if present, is a matter of looking at the compatile string. > + > res = platform_get_resource_byname(pdev, IORESOURCE_MEM, "sram"); > - scp->sram_base = devm_ioremap_resource(dev, res); > + if (core_id == SCP_CORE_1) > + scp->sram_base = devm_ioremap(dev, res->start, resource_size(res)); > + else > + scp->sram_base = devm_ioremap_resource(dev, res); > + This looks very broken... For this to work you would need to have two DT entries with the "mediatek,mt8195-scp-dual" compatible properly, one with "mediatek,scp-core = <&scp_dual1 0>;" and another one with "mediatek,scp-core = <&scp_dual0 1>;". Which is also very broken... Here you have a binding whose first argument is a reference to the core sibling while the second argument is a characteristic of the current core, which is highly confusing. I suggest what when you see the compatible binding "mediatek,mt8195-scp", a single core is initialized. If you see "mediatek,mt8195-scp-dual", both cores are initialized as part of the _same_ probe. If the above analysis is not correct it means I misinterpreted your work and if so, a serious amount of comments is needed _and_ a very detailed example in "mtk,scp.yaml" that leaves no room for interpretation. I will stop reviewing this patchset until you have clarified how this works. Thanks, Mathieu > if (IS_ERR(scp->sram_base)) > return dev_err_probe(dev, PTR_ERR(scp->sram_base), > "Failed to parse and map sram memory\n"); > @@ -873,7 +886,12 @@ static int scp_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > scp->l1tcm_phys = res->start; > } > > - scp->reg_base = devm_platform_ioremap_resource_byname(pdev, "cfg"); > + res = platform_get_resource_byname(pdev, IORESOURCE_MEM, "cfg"); > + if (core_id == SCP_CORE_1) > + scp->reg_base = devm_ioremap(dev, res->start, resource_size(res)); > + else > + scp->reg_base = devm_ioremap_resource(dev, res); > + > if (IS_ERR(scp->reg_base)) > return dev_err_probe(dev, PTR_ERR(scp->reg_base), > "Failed to parse and map cfg memory\n"); > -- > 2.18.0 >
