On 9/12/2022 4:25 AM, Stephen Boyd wrote: Thanks for your time Stephen!!!
Quoting Srinivasa Rao Mandadapu (2022-09-08 06:23:38)diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/qcom_q6v5_adsp.c b/drivers/remoteproc/qcom_q6v5_adsp.c index 02d17b4..207270d4 100644 --- a/drivers/remoteproc/qcom_q6v5_adsp.c +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/qcom_q6v5_adsp.c @@ -447,7 +447,7 @@ static unsigned long adsp_panic(struct rproc *rproc) return qcom_q6v5_panic(&adsp->q6v5); } -static const struct rproc_ops adsp_ops = { +static struct rproc_ops adsp_ops = {This is sad..start = adsp_start, .stop = adsp_stop, .da_to_va = adsp_da_to_va, @@ -590,6 +590,9 @@ static int adsp_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) return ret; } + if (desc->has_iommu) + adsp_ops.parse_fw = rproc_elf_load_rsc_table; +Why not have two different set of ops so that the function pointer table can't be hijacked? One for the parse_fw callback? Or simply return from rproc_elf_load_rsc_table() when has_iommu is false?
Okay. Will change accordingly.
rproc = rproc_alloc(&pdev->dev, pdev->name, &adsp_ops,
