Hi Daniel > Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 0/6] remoteproc: imx_rproc: support firmware in > DDR > > On Fri, Jan 27, 2023 at 11:26 AM Peng Fan (OSS) <peng.fan@xxxxxxxxxxx> > wrote: > > > > From: Peng Fan <peng.fan@xxxxxxx> > > > > V2: > > patch 4 is introduced for sparse check warning fix > > > > This pachset is to support i.MX8M and i.MX93 Cortex-M core firmware > > could be in DDR, not just the default TCM. > > > > i.MX8M needs stack/pc value be stored in TCML entry address[0,4], the > > initial value could be got from firmware first section ".interrupts". > > i.MX93 is a bit different, it just needs the address of .interrupts > > section. NXP SDK always has .interrupts section. > > > > So first we need find the .interrupts section from firmware, so patch > > 1 is to reuse the code of find_table to introduce a new API > > rproc_elf_find_shdr to find shdr, the it could reused by i.MX driver. > > > > Patch 2 is introduce devtype for i.MX8M/93 > > > > Although patch 3 is correct the mapping, but this area was never used > > by NXP SW team, we directly use the DDR region, not the alias region. > > Since this patchset is first to support firmware in DDR, mark this > > patch as a fix does not make much sense. > > > > patch 4 and 5 is support i.MX8M/93 firmware in DDR with parsing > > .interrupts section. Detailed information in each patch commit message. > > > > Patches were tested on i.MX8MQ-EVK i.MX8MP-EVK i.MX93-11x11-EVK > > Hi Peng, > > Few observations: > > - bugfixes should come first in the series. > - in case we want to patches to be pushed back into stable releases please > add "Fixes: " tag. You mean patch 4: sparse warning fix? Or patch 3 is correct the mapping? Or both? For patch 3, I would not take it as fix, I just think there is no people using this ddr alias address. If you prefer, I could add a fix tag for patch 3. Thanks, Peng.
