On Thu, Aug 22, 2024 at 10:52:40AM +0530, Beleswar Prasad Padhi wrote:
>
> On 21-08-2024 23:40, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> > On 21.08.24 07:30, Beleswar Prasad Padhi wrote:
> > > On 19-08-2024 20:54, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> > > > From: Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > >
> > > > By simply bailing out, the driver was violating its rule and internal
> > >
> > > Using device lifecycle managed functions to register the rproc
> > > (devm_rproc_add()), bailing out with an error code will work.
> > >
> > > > assumptions that either both or no rproc should be initialized. E.g.,
> > > > this could cause the first core to be available but not the second one,
> > > > leading to crashes on its shutdown later on while trying to dereference
> > > > that second instance.
> > > >
> > > > Fixes: 61f6f68447ab ("remoteproc: k3-r5: Wait for core0 power-up
> > > > before powering up core1")
> > > > Signed-off-by: Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > ---
> > > > drivers/remoteproc/ti_k3_r5_remoteproc.c | 3 ++-
> > > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/ti_k3_r5_remoteproc.c
> > > > b/drivers/remoteproc/ti_k3_r5_remoteproc.c
> > > > index 39a47540c590..eb09d2e9b32a 100644
> > > > --- a/drivers/remoteproc/ti_k3_r5_remoteproc.c
> > > > +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/ti_k3_r5_remoteproc.c
> > > > @@ -1332,7 +1332,7 @@ static int k3_r5_cluster_rproc_init(struct
> > > > platform_device *pdev)
> > > > dev_err(dev,
> > > > "Timed out waiting for %s core to power up!\n",
> > > > rproc->name);
> > > > - return ret;
> > > > + goto err_powerup;
> > > > }
> > > > }
> > > > @@ -1348,6 +1348,7 @@ static int k3_r5_cluster_rproc_init(struct
> > > > platform_device *pdev)
> > > > }
> > > > }
> > > > +err_powerup:
> > > > rproc_del(rproc);
> > >
> > > Please use devm_rproc_add() to avoid having to do rproc_del() manually
> > > here.
> > This is just be the tip of the iceberg. The whole code needs to be
> > reworked accordingly so that we can drop these goto, not just this one.
>
>
> You are correct. Unfortunately, the organic growth of this driver has
> resulted in a need to refactor. I plan on doing this and post the
> refactoring soon. This should be part of the overall refactoring as
> suggested by Mathieu[2]. But for the immediate problem, your fix does patch
> things up.. hence:
>
> Acked-by: Beleswar Padhi <b-padhi@xxxxxx>
>
I have applied this patch.
Thanks,
Mathieu
> [2]: https://lore.kernel.org/all/Zr4w8Vj0mVo5sBsJ@p14s/
>
> > Just look at k3_r5_reserved_mem_init. Your change in [1] was also too
> > early in this regard, breaking current error handling additionally.
>
>
>
> Curious, Could you point out how does the change in [1] breaks current error
> handling?
>
> >
> > I'll stop my whac-a-mole. Someone needs to sit down and do that for the
> > complete code consistently. And test the error cases.
> >
> > Jan
> >
> > [1]
> > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git/commit/?id=f3f11cfe890733373ddbb1ce8991ccd4ee5e79e1
> >
> > > > err_add:
> > > > k3_r5_reserved_mem_exit(kproc);
