Good day, On Fri, Jun 21, 2024 at 05:00:55PM +0200, Richard Genoud wrote: > ret variable was used to test reset status, get from > reset_control_status() call. But this variable was overwritten by > ti_sci_proc_get_status() a few lines bellow. > And as ti_sci_proc_get_status() returns 0 or a negative value (in this > latter case, followed by a return), the expression !ret was always true, > > Clearly, this was not what was intended: > In the comment above it's said that "requires both local and module > resets to be deasserted"; if reset_control_status() returns 0 it means > that the reset line is deasserted. > So, it's pretty clear that the return value of reset_control_status() > was intended to be used instead of ti_sci_proc_get_status() return > value. > > This could lead in an incorrect IPC-only mode detection if reset line is > asserted (so reset_control_status() return > 0) and c_state != 0 and > halted == 0. > In this case, the old code would have detected an IPC-only mode instead > of a mismatched mode. > Your assessment seems to be correct. That said I'd like to have an RB or a TB from someone in the TI delegation - guys please have a look. Thanks, Mathieu > Fixes: 1168af40b1ad ("remoteproc: k3-r5: Add support for IPC-only mode for all R5Fs") > Signed-off-by: Richard Genoud <richard.genoud@xxxxxxxxxxx> > --- > drivers/remoteproc/ti_k3_r5_remoteproc.c | 13 +++++++------ > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/ti_k3_r5_remoteproc.c b/drivers/remoteproc/ti_k3_r5_remoteproc.c > index 50e486bcfa10..39a47540c590 100644 > --- a/drivers/remoteproc/ti_k3_r5_remoteproc.c > +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/ti_k3_r5_remoteproc.c > @@ -1144,6 +1144,7 @@ static int k3_r5_rproc_configure_mode(struct k3_r5_rproc *kproc) > u32 atcm_enable, btcm_enable, loczrama; > struct k3_r5_core *core0; > enum cluster_mode mode = cluster->mode; > + int reset_ctrl_status; > int ret; > > core0 = list_first_entry(&cluster->cores, struct k3_r5_core, elem); > @@ -1160,11 +1161,11 @@ static int k3_r5_rproc_configure_mode(struct k3_r5_rproc *kproc) > r_state, c_state); > } > > - ret = reset_control_status(core->reset); > - if (ret < 0) { > + reset_ctrl_status = reset_control_status(core->reset); > + if (reset_ctrl_status < 0) { > dev_err(cdev, "failed to get initial local reset status, ret = %d\n", > - ret); > - return ret; > + reset_ctrl_status); > + return reset_ctrl_status; > } > > /* > @@ -1199,7 +1200,7 @@ static int k3_r5_rproc_configure_mode(struct k3_r5_rproc *kproc) > * irrelevant if module reset is asserted (POR value has local reset > * deasserted), and is deemed as remoteproc mode > */ > - if (c_state && !ret && !halted) { > + if (c_state && !reset_ctrl_status && !halted) { > dev_info(cdev, "configured R5F for IPC-only mode\n"); > kproc->rproc->state = RPROC_DETACHED; > ret = 1; > @@ -1217,7 +1218,7 @@ static int k3_r5_rproc_configure_mode(struct k3_r5_rproc *kproc) > ret = 0; > } else { > dev_err(cdev, "mismatched mode: local_reset = %s, module_reset = %s, core_state = %s\n", > - !ret ? "deasserted" : "asserted", > + !reset_ctrl_status ? "deasserted" : "asserted", > c_state ? "deasserted" : "asserted", > halted ? "halted" : "unhalted"); > ret = -EINVAL;