On Sat, Oct 09, 2021 at 05:11:20AM -0700, Tom Rix wrote: > > On 10/9/21 1:08 AM, Xu Yilun wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 29, 2021 at 04:00:20PM -0700, Russ Weight wrote: > > > The FPGA Image Load framework provides an API to upload image > > > files to an FPGA device. Image files are self-describing. They could > > > contain FPGA images, BMC images, Root Entry Hashes, or other device > > > specific files. It is up to the lower-level device driver and the > > > target device to authenticate and disposition the file data. > > I've reconsider the FPGA persistent image update again, and think we > > may include it in FPGA manager framework. > > > > Sorry I raised this topic again when it is already at patch v17, but now > > I need to consider more seriously than before. > > > > We have consensus the FPGA persistent image update is just like a normal > > firmware update which finally writes the nvmem like flash or eeprom, > > while the current FPGA manager deals with the active FPGA region update > > and re-activation. Could we just expand the FPGA manager and let it handle > > the nvmem update as well? Many FPGA cards have nvmem and downloaders > > supports updating both FPGA region and nvmem. > > > > According to the patchset, the basic workflow of the 2 update types are > > quite similar, get the data, prepare for the HW, write and complete. > > They are already implemented in FPGA manager. We've discussed some > > differences like threading or canceling the update, which are > > not provided by FPGA manager but they may also nice to have for FPGA > > region update. An FPGA region update may also last for a long time?? > > So I think having 2 sets of similar frameworks in FPGA is unnecessary. > > > > My quick mind is that we add some flags in struct fpga_mgr & struct > > fpga_image_info to indicate the HW capability (support FPGA region > > update or nvmem update or both) of the download engine and the provided > > image type. Then the low-level driver knows how to download if it > > supports both image types. > > > > An char device could be added for each fpga manager dev, providing the > > user APIs for nvmem update. We may not use the char dev for FPGA region > > update cause it changes the system HW devices and needs device hotplug > > in FPGA region. We'd better leave it to FPGA region class, this is > > another topic. > > > > More discussion is appreciated. > > I also think fpga_mgr could be extended. > > In this patchset, > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-fpga/20210625195849.837976-1-trix@xxxxxxxxxx/ > > A second, similar set of write ops was added to fpga_manger_ops, > > new bit/flag was added to fpga_image_info > > The intent was for dfl to add their specific ops to cover what is done in > this patchset. I think we don't have to add 2 ops for reconfig & reimage in framework, the 2 processes are almost the same. Just add the _REIMAGE (or something else, NVMEM?) flag for fpga_image_info, and low level drivers handle it as they do for other flags. How do you think? Thanks, Yilun > > Any other driver would do similar. > > Is this close to what you are thinking ? > > Tom > > > > > Thanks, > > Yilun > >
