Hi Leonard, I have queued patches for this driver that will break this patch. Please re-submit when v6.9-rc1 is out and rproc-next has been updated, which should be around the middle of next week. Thanks, Mathieu On Sat, Mar 16, 2024 at 08:16:42PM +0200, Leonard Crestez wrote: > Supporting remoteproc coredump requires the platform-specific driver to > register coredump segments to be dumped. Do this by calling > rproc_coredump_add_segment for every carveout. > > Also call rproc_coredump_set_elf_info when then rproc is created. If the > ELFCLASS parameter is not provided then coredump fails with an error. > Other drivers seem to pass EM_NONE for the machine argument but for me > this shows a warning in gdb. Pass EM_ARM because this is an ARM R5. > > Signed-off-by: Leonard Crestez <cdleonard@xxxxxxxxx> > --- > > Tests were done by triggering an deliberate crash using remoteproc > debugfs: echo 2 > /sys/kernel/debug/remoteproc/remoteproc0/crash > > This was tested using RPU apps which use RAM for everything so TCM dump > was not verified. The freertos-gdb script package showed credible data: > > https://github.com/espressif/freertos-gdb > > The R5 cache is not flushed so RAM might be out of date which is > actually very bad because information most relevant to determining the > cause of a crash is lost. Possible workaround would be to flush caches > in some sort of R5 crash handler? I don't think Linux can do anything > about this limitation. > > The generated coredump doesn't contain registers, this seems to be a > limitation shared with other rproc coredumps. It's not clear how the apu > could access rpu registers on zynqmp, my only idea would be to use the > coresight dap but that sounds difficult. > > --- > drivers/remoteproc/xlnx_r5_remoteproc.c | 5 +++++ > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/xlnx_r5_remoteproc.c b/drivers/remoteproc/xlnx_r5_remoteproc.c > index 4395edea9a64..cfbd97b89c26 100644 > --- a/drivers/remoteproc/xlnx_r5_remoteproc.c > +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/xlnx_r5_remoteproc.c > @@ -484,10 +484,11 @@ static int add_mem_regions_carveout(struct rproc *rproc) > of_node_put(it.node); > return -ENOMEM; > } > > rproc_add_carveout(rproc, rproc_mem); > + rproc_coredump_add_segment(rproc, rmem->base, rmem->size); > > dev_dbg(&rproc->dev, "reserved mem carveout %s addr=%llx, size=0x%llx", > it.node->name, rmem->base, rmem->size); > i++; > } > @@ -595,10 +596,11 @@ static int add_tcm_carveout_split_mode(struct rproc *rproc) > zynqmp_pm_release_node(pm_domain_id); > goto release_tcm_split; > } > > rproc_add_carveout(rproc, rproc_mem); > + rproc_coredump_add_segment(rproc, da, bank_size); > } > > return 0; > > release_tcm_split: > @@ -674,10 +676,11 @@ static int add_tcm_carveout_lockstep_mode(struct rproc *rproc) > goto release_tcm_lockstep; > } > > /* If registration is success, add carveouts */ > rproc_add_carveout(rproc, rproc_mem); > + rproc_coredump_add_segment(rproc, da, bank_size); > > dev_dbg(dev, "TCM carveout lockstep mode %s addr=0x%llx, da=0x%x, size=0x%lx", > bank_name, bank_addr, da, bank_size); > } > > @@ -851,10 +854,12 @@ static struct zynqmp_r5_core *zynqmp_r5_add_rproc_core(struct device *cdev) > if (!r5_rproc) { > dev_err(cdev, "failed to allocate memory for rproc instance\n"); > return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM); > } > > + rproc_coredump_set_elf_info(r5_rproc, ELFCLASS32, EM_ARM); > + > r5_rproc->auto_boot = false; > r5_core = r5_rproc->priv; > r5_core->dev = cdev; > r5_core->np = dev_of_node(cdev); > if (!r5_core->np) { > -- > 2.34.1
