On 6/18/24 11:55 AM, Mathieu Poirier wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 18, 2024 at 11:45:28AM -0500, Tanmay Shah wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 6/17/24 10:40 AM, Mathieu Poirier wrote:
>> > Good day,
>> >
>> > On Mon, Jun 10, 2024 at 08:42:27AM -0700, Tanmay Shah wrote:
>> >> It is possible that remote processor is already running before
>> >> linux boot or remoteproc platform driver probe. Implement required
>> >> remoteproc framework ops to provide resource table address and
>> >> connect or disconnect with remote processor in such case.
>> >>
>> >> Signed-off-by: Tanmay Shah <tanmay.shah@xxxxxxx>
>> >> ---
>> >>
>> >> Changes in v5:
>> >> - Fix comment on assigning DETACHED state to remoteproc instance
>> >> during driver probe.
>> >> - Fix patch subject and remove "drivers"
>> >>
>> >> Changes in v4:
>> >> - Move change log out of commit text
>> >>
>> >> Changes in v3:
>> >> - Drop SRAM patch from the series
>> >> - Change type from "struct resource_table *" to void __iomem *
>> >> - Change comment format from /** to /*
>> >> - Remove unmap of resource table va address during detach, allowing
>> >> attach-detach-reattach use case.
>> >> - Unmap rsc_data_va after retrieving resource table data structure.
>> >> - Unmap resource table va during driver remove op
>> >>
>> >> Changes in v2:
>> >> - Fix typecast warnings reported using sparse tool.
>> >> - Fix following sparse warnings:
>> >>
>> >> drivers/remoteproc/xlnx_r5_remoteproc.c | 173 +++++++++++++++++++++++-
>> >> 1 file changed, 169 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>> >>
>> >> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/xlnx_r5_remoteproc.c b/drivers/remoteproc/xlnx_r5_remoteproc.c
>> >> index 84243d1dff9f..6ddce5650f95 100644
>> >> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/xlnx_r5_remoteproc.c
>> >> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/xlnx_r5_remoteproc.c
>> >> @@ -25,6 +25,10 @@
>> >> /* RX mailbox client buffer max length */
>> >> #define MBOX_CLIENT_BUF_MAX (IPI_BUF_LEN_MAX + \
>> >> sizeof(struct zynqmp_ipi_message))
>> >> +
>> >> +#define RSC_TBL_XLNX_MAGIC ((uint32_t)'x' << 24 | (uint32_t)'a' << 16 | \
>> >> + (uint32_t)'m' << 8 | (uint32_t)'p')
>> >> +
>> >> /*
>> >> * settings for RPU cluster mode which
>> >> * reflects possible values of xlnx,cluster-mode dt-property
>> >> @@ -73,6 +77,26 @@ struct mbox_info {
>> >> struct mbox_chan *rx_chan;
>> >> };
>> >>
>> >> +/**
>> >> + * struct rsc_tbl_data
>> >> + *
>> >> + * Platform specific data structure used to sync resource table address.
>> >> + * It's important to maintain order and size of each field on remote side.
>> >> + *
>> >> + * @version: version of data structure
>> >> + * @magic_num: 32-bit magic number.
>> >> + * @comp_magic_num: complement of above magic number
>> >> + * @rsc_tbl_size: resource table size
>> >> + * @rsc_tbl: resource table address
>> >> + */
>> >> +struct rsc_tbl_data {
>> >> + const int version;
>> >> + const u32 magic_num;
>> >> + const u32 comp_magic_num;
>> >> + const u32 rsc_tbl_size;
>> >> + const uintptr_t rsc_tbl;
>> >> +} __packed;
>> >> +
>> >> /*
>> >> * Hardcoded TCM bank values. This will stay in driver to maintain backward
>> >> * compatibility with device-tree that does not have TCM information.
>> >> @@ -95,20 +119,24 @@ static const struct mem_bank_data zynqmp_tcm_banks_lockstep[] = {
>> >> /**
>> >> * struct zynqmp_r5_core
>> >> *
>> >> + * @rsc_tbl_va: resource table virtual address
>> >> * @dev: device of RPU instance
>> >> * @np: device node of RPU instance
>> >> * @tcm_bank_count: number TCM banks accessible to this RPU
>> >> * @tcm_banks: array of each TCM bank data
>> >> * @rproc: rproc handle
>> >> + * @rsc_tbl_size: resource table size retrieved from remote
>> >> * @pm_domain_id: RPU CPU power domain id
>> >> * @ipi: pointer to mailbox information
>> >> */
>> >> struct zynqmp_r5_core {
>> >> + void __iomem *rsc_tbl_va;
>> >> struct device *dev;
>> >> struct device_node *np;
>> >> int tcm_bank_count;
>> >> struct mem_bank_data **tcm_banks;
>> >> struct rproc *rproc;
>> >> + u32 rsc_tbl_size;
>> >> u32 pm_domain_id;
>> >> struct mbox_info *ipi;
>> >> };
>> >> @@ -621,10 +649,19 @@ static int zynqmp_r5_rproc_prepare(struct rproc *rproc)
>> >> {
>> >> int ret;
>> >>
>> >> - ret = add_tcm_banks(rproc);
>> >> - if (ret) {
>> >> - dev_err(&rproc->dev, "failed to get TCM banks, err %d\n", ret);
>> >> - return ret;
>> >> + /*
>> >> + * For attach/detach use case, Firmware is already loaded so
>> >> + * TCM isn't really needed at all. Also, for security TCM can be
>> >> + * locked in such case and linux may not have access at all.
>> >> + * So avoid adding TCM banks. TCM power-domains requested during attach
>> >> + * callback.
>> >> + */
>> >> + if (rproc->state != RPROC_DETACHED) {
>> >> + ret = add_tcm_banks(rproc);
>> >> + if (ret) {
>> >> + dev_err(&rproc->dev, "failed to get TCM banks, err %d\n", ret);
>> >> + return ret;
>> >> + }
>> >
>> > In the normal case function add_tcm_banks() will call zynqmp_pm_request_node()
>> > but in the attach case, that gets done in zynqmp_r5_attach(). Either way,
>> > zynqmp_pm_release_node() is called in zynqmp_r5_rproc_unprepare(). This is
>> > highly confusing.
>> >
>> > I suggest adding a check to see if the remote processor is being attached to in
>> > add_tcm_banks() and skip the rest of the TCM initialization if it is the case.
>> >
>>
>> If we move this check to add_tcm_banks, then I think I should perform request_node
>> from within add_tcm_banks only and remove registering attach() op as well. I can call
>> request_node from within add_tcm_banks() and then avoid rest of initialization.
>>
>> I am not sure if without attach() registartion, I can still register detach() and
>> it's valid. I will test this.
>>
>
> Just add an attach() that returns 0.
Thanks, Ack.
>
>>
>> >> }
>> >>
>> >> ret = add_mem_regions_carveout(rproc);
>> >> @@ -662,6 +699,120 @@ static int zynqmp_r5_rproc_unprepare(struct rproc *rproc)
>> >> return 0;
>> >> }
>> >>
>> >> +static struct resource_table *zynqmp_r5_get_loaded_rsc_table(struct rproc *rproc,
>> >> + size_t *size)
>> >> +{
>> >> + struct zynqmp_r5_core *r5_core;
>> >> +
>> >> + r5_core = rproc->priv;
>> >> +
>> >> + *size = r5_core->rsc_tbl_size;
>> >> +
>> >> + return (struct resource_table *)r5_core->rsc_tbl_va;
>> >> +}
>> >> +
>> >> +static int zynqmp_r5_get_rsc_table_va(struct zynqmp_r5_core *r5_core)
>> >> +{
>> >> + struct resource_table *rsc_tbl_addr;
>> >> + struct device *dev = r5_core->dev;
>> >> + struct rsc_tbl_data *rsc_data_va;
>> >> + struct resource res_mem;
>> >> + struct device_node *np;
>> >> + int ret;
>> >> +
>> >> + /*
>> >> + * It is expected from remote processor firmware to provide resource
>> >> + * table address via struct rsc_tbl_data data structure.
>> >> + * Start address of first entry under "memory-region" property list
>> >> + * contains that data structure which holds resource table address, size
>> >> + * and some magic number to validate correct resource table entry.
>> >> + */
>> >> + np = of_parse_phandle(r5_core->np, "memory-region", 0);
>> >> + if (!np) {
>> >> + dev_err(dev, "failed to get memory region dev node\n");
>> >> + return -EINVAL;
>> >> + }
>> >> +
>> >> + ret = of_address_to_resource(np, 0, &res_mem);
>> >
>> > Shouldn't an of_put_node() be added right here?
>>
>> Usually function documentation explicitly ask if it is needed. I will check
>> and add if required. I will also check any other references in kernel.
>>
>
> You need to release @np acquired by of_parse_phandle() above.
>
Yes I missed that part. I was looking at of_address_to_resource documentation.
Thanks.
>> >
>> >> + if (ret) {
>> >> + dev_err(dev, "failed to get memory-region resource addr\n");
>> >> + return -EINVAL;
>> >> + }
>> >> +
>> >> + rsc_data_va = (struct rsc_tbl_data *)ioremap_wc(res_mem.start,
>> >> + sizeof(struct rsc_tbl_data));
>> >> + if (!rsc_data_va) {
>> >> + dev_err(dev, "failed to map resource table data address\n");
>> >> + return -EIO;
>> >> + }
>> >> +
>> >> + /*
>> >> + * If RSC_TBL_XLNX_MAGIC number and its complement isn't found then
>> >> + * do not consider resource table address valid and don't attach
>> >> + */
>> >> + if (rsc_data_va->magic_num != RSC_TBL_XLNX_MAGIC ||
>> >> + rsc_data_va->comp_magic_num != ~RSC_TBL_XLNX_MAGIC) {
>> >> + dev_dbg(dev, "invalid magic number, won't attach\n");
>> >> + return -EINVAL;
>> >> + }
>> >> +
>> >> + r5_core->rsc_tbl_va = ioremap_wc(rsc_data_va->rsc_tbl,
>> >> + rsc_data_va->rsc_tbl_size);
>> >> + if (!r5_core->rsc_tbl_va) {
>> >> + dev_err(dev, "failed to get resource table va\n");
>> >> + return -EINVAL;
>> >> + }
>> >> +
>> >> + rsc_tbl_addr = (struct resource_table *)r5_core->rsc_tbl_va;
>> >> +
>> >> + /*
>> >> + * As of now resource table version 1 is expected. Don't fail to attach
>> >> + * but warn users about it.
>> >> + */
>> >> + if (rsc_tbl_addr->ver != 1)
>> >> + dev_warn(dev, "unexpected resource table version %d\n",
>> >> + rsc_tbl_addr->ver);
>> >> +
>> >> + iounmap((void __iomem *)rsc_data_va);
>> >> + r5_core->rsc_tbl_size = rsc_data_va->rsc_tbl_size;
>> >> +
>> >
>> > Can you spot the problem here?
>>
>> Ah! It's like use-after-free problem. Address should have been unmapped
>> at then end of the function. Surprisingly My test passed on platform, so I
>> didn't pay attention. This will be fixed in next revision.
>
> I'm also surprised - this should have blown up.
>
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Tanmay
>>
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > Mathieu
>> >
>> >> + return 0;
>> >> +}
>> >> +
>> >> +static int zynqmp_r5_attach(struct rproc *rproc)
>> >> +{
>> >> + struct zynqmp_r5_core *r5_core = rproc->priv;
>> >> + int i, pm_domain_id, ret;
>> >> +
>> >> + /*
>> >> + * Firmware is loaded in TCM. Request TCM power domains to notify
>> >> + * platform management controller that TCM is in use. This will be
>> >> + * released during unprepare callback.
>> >> + */
>> >> + for (i = 0; i < r5_core->tcm_bank_count; i++) {
>> >> + pm_domain_id = r5_core->tcm_banks[i]->pm_domain_id;
>> >> + ret = zynqmp_pm_request_node(pm_domain_id,
>> >> + ZYNQMP_PM_CAPABILITY_ACCESS, 0,
>> >> + ZYNQMP_PM_REQUEST_ACK_BLOCKING);
>> >> + if (ret < 0)
>> >> + pr_warn("TCM %d can't be requested\n", i);
>> >> + }
>> >> +
>> >> + return 0;
>> >> +}
>> >> +
>> >> +static int zynqmp_r5_detach(struct rproc *rproc)
>> >> +{
>> >> + /*
>> >> + * Generate last notification to remote after clearing virtio flag.
>> >> + * Remote can avoid polling on virtio reset flag if kick is generated
>> >> + * during detach by host and check virtio reset flag on kick interrupt.
>> >> + */
>> >> + zynqmp_r5_rproc_kick(rproc, 0);
>> >> +
>> >> + return 0;
>> >> +}
>> >> +
>> >> static const struct rproc_ops zynqmp_r5_rproc_ops = {
>> >> .prepare = zynqmp_r5_rproc_prepare,
>> >> .unprepare = zynqmp_r5_rproc_unprepare,
>> >> @@ -673,6 +824,9 @@ static const struct rproc_ops zynqmp_r5_rproc_ops = {
>> >> .sanity_check = rproc_elf_sanity_check,
>> >> .get_boot_addr = rproc_elf_get_boot_addr,
>> >> .kick = zynqmp_r5_rproc_kick,
>> >> + .get_loaded_rsc_table = zynqmp_r5_get_loaded_rsc_table,
>> >> + .attach = zynqmp_r5_attach,
>> >> + .detach = zynqmp_r5_detach,
>> >> };
>> >>
>> >> /**
>> >> @@ -723,6 +877,16 @@ static struct zynqmp_r5_core *zynqmp_r5_add_rproc_core(struct device *cdev)
>> >> goto free_rproc;
>> >> }
>> >>
>> >> + /*
>> >> + * If firmware is already available in the memory then move rproc state
>> >> + * to DETACHED. Firmware can be preloaded via debugger or by any other
>> >> + * agent (processors) in the system.
>> >> + * If firmware isn't available in the memory and resource table isn't
>> >> + * found, then rproc state remains OFFLINE.
>> >> + */
>> >> + if (!zynqmp_r5_get_rsc_table_va(r5_core))
>> >> + r5_rproc->state = RPROC_DETACHED;
>> >> +
>> >> r5_core->rproc = r5_rproc;
>> >> return r5_core;
>> >>
>> >> @@ -1134,6 +1298,7 @@ static void zynqmp_r5_cluster_exit(void *data)
>> >> for (i = 0; i < cluster->core_count; i++) {
>> >> r5_core = cluster->r5_cores[i];
>> >> zynqmp_r5_free_mbox(r5_core->ipi);
>> >> + iounmap(r5_core->rsc_tbl_va);
>> >> of_reserved_mem_device_release(r5_core->dev);
>> >> put_device(r5_core->dev);
>> >> rproc_del(r5_core->rproc);
>> >>
>> >> base-commit: d7faf9a16886a748c9dd4063ea897f1e68b412f2
>> >> --
>> >> 2.37.6
>> >>
>>
