Good day Yann, On Fri, Feb 02, 2024 at 10:14:08AM +0100, Arnaud POULIQUEN wrote: > Hello Yann, > > On 1/30/24 11:20, Yann Sionneau wrote: > > Hello, > > > > On 1/23/24 14:32, Yann Sionneau wrote: > >> Hello, > >> > >> How interesting to upstream Linux would it be to have a way for Linux kernel > >> or user space to pass a device tree blob to remote processor when starting a > >> remote proc FW? > >> > >> For instance we could imagine something like this: > >> > >> 1/ user space does echo -n firmware.elf > > >> /sys/class/remoteproc/remoteprocXXX/firmware > >> > >> 2/ user space does echo -n my_dt.dtb > /sys/class/remoteproc/remoteprocXXX/dtb > >> > >> 3/ user space does echo start > /sys/class/remoteproc/remoteprocXXX/state > > > > Any opinion on this proposal? > > > Interesting use case. There is no concrete need in ST, but it raises the > question of providing extra data with the firmware to the remote processor. > I agree with Arnaud. From a mechanical point of view it is interesting and doesn't pause a serious technical challenge. That said I don't really understand the motivation behind the idea. More details the exact problem you want to fix would be welcomed. > In a first approach, my personal feeling is that the ELF and the DTB are > interdependent. > So having a mechanism to ensure coherency between both could be important. > > Then it could be interesting to address the need in a more generic way > to be able to transfer extra data, for instance an audio tuning for a DSP. > Adding a specific sysfs for each specific need could not be a good idea in long > term. > > Have you looked into some other approaches such as adding the DTB as a specific > section of your ELF file,or adding the support of a new format that packages > everything together (for instance FIP)? Here too I have to agree with Arnaud. > Regards, > Arnaud > > > > > Thanks! > > > > Regards, > >
