Good morning,
On Tue, Feb 13, 2024 at 09:54:50AM -0800, Tanmay Shah wrote:
> ZynqMP TCM information was fixed in driver. Now ZynqMP TCM information
> is available in device-tree. Parse TCM information in driver
> as per new bindings.
>
> Signed-off-by: Tanmay Shah <tanmay.s...@amd.com>
> ---
>
> Changes in v10:
> - Remove redundant changes to handle TCM in lockstep mode
>
> Changes in v9:
> - Introduce new API to request and release core1 TCM power-domains in
> lockstep mode. This will be used during prepare -> add_tcm_banks
> callback to enable TCM in lockstep mode.
> - Parse TCM from device-tree in lockstep mode and split mode in
> uniform way.
> - Fix TCM representation in device-tree in lockstep mode.
>
> Changes in v8:
> - Remove pm_domains framework
> - Remove checking of pm_domain_id validation to power on/off tcm
> - Remove spurious change
> - parse power-domains property from device-tree and use EEMI calls
> to power on/off TCM instead of using pm domains framework
>
> Changes in v7:
> - move checking of pm_domain_id from previous patch
> - fix mem_bank_data memory allocation
>
> drivers/remoteproc/xlnx_r5_remoteproc.c | 112 ++++++++++++++++++++++--
> 1 file changed, 107 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/xlnx_r5_remoteproc.c
> b/drivers/remoteproc/xlnx_r5_remoteproc.c
> index 42b0384d34f2..49e8eaf83fce 100644
> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/xlnx_r5_remoteproc.c
> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/xlnx_r5_remoteproc.c
> @@ -74,8 +74,8 @@ struct mbox_info {
> };
>
> /*
> - * Hardcoded TCM bank values. This will be removed once TCM bindings are
> - * accepted for system-dt specifications and upstreamed in linux kernel
> + * Hardcoded TCM bank values. This will stay in driver to maintain backward
> + * compatibility with device-tree that does not have TCM information.
> */
> static const struct mem_bank_data zynqmp_tcm_banks_split[] = {
> {0xffe00000UL, 0x0, 0x10000UL, PD_R5_0_ATCM, "atcm0"}, /* TCM 64KB each
> */
> @@ -757,6 +757,103 @@ static struct zynqmp_r5_core
> *zynqmp_r5_add_rproc_core(struct device *cdev)
> return ERR_PTR(ret);
> }
>
> +static int zynqmp_r5_get_tcm_node_from_dt(struct zynqmp_r5_cluster *cluster)
> +{
> + int i, j, tcm_bank_count, ret, tcm_pd_idx, pd_count;
> + struct of_phandle_args out_args = {0};
Is this really needed? As far as I can tell it isn't.
Otherwise and if it wasn't for the modification on the DT side, I would apply
this patch.
Thanks,
Mathieu
> + struct zynqmp_r5_core *r5_core;
> + struct platform_device *cpdev;
> + struct mem_bank_data *tcm;
> + struct device_node *np;
> + struct resource *res;
> + u64 abs_addr, size;
> + struct device *dev;
> +
> + for (i = 0; i < cluster->core_count; i++) {
> + r5_core = cluster->r5_cores[i];
> + dev = r5_core->dev;
> + np = r5_core->np;
> +
> + pd_count = of_count_phandle_with_args(np, "power-domains",
> + "#power-domain-cells");
> +
> + if (pd_count <= 0) {
> + dev_err(dev, "invalid power-domains property, %d\n",
> pd_count);
> + return -EINVAL;
> + }
> +
> + /* First entry in power-domains list is for r5 core, rest for
> TCM. */
> + tcm_bank_count = pd_count - 1;
> +
> + if (tcm_bank_count <= 0) {
> + dev_err(dev, "invalid TCM count %d\n", tcm_bank_count);
> + return -EINVAL;
> + }
> +
> + r5_core->tcm_banks = devm_kcalloc(dev, tcm_bank_count,
> + sizeof(struct mem_bank_data
> *),
> + GFP_KERNEL);
> + if (!r5_core->tcm_banks)
> + ret = -ENOMEM;
> +
> + r5_core->tcm_bank_count = tcm_bank_count;
> + for (j = 0, tcm_pd_idx = 1; j < tcm_bank_count; j++,
> tcm_pd_idx++) {
> + tcm = devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof(struct mem_bank_data),
> + GFP_KERNEL);
> + if (!tcm)
> + return -ENOMEM;
> +
> + r5_core->tcm_banks[j] = tcm;
> +
> + /* Get power-domains id of TCM. */
> + ret = of_parse_phandle_with_args(np, "power-domains",
> + "#power-domain-cells",
> + tcm_pd_idx, &out_args);
> + if (ret) {
> + dev_err(r5_core->dev,
> + "failed to get tcm %d pm domain, ret
> %d\n",
> + tcm_pd_idx, ret);
> + return ret;
> + }
> + tcm->pm_domain_id = out_args.args[0];
> + of_node_put(out_args.np);
> +
> + /* Get TCM address without translation. */
> + ret = of_property_read_reg(np, j, &abs_addr, &size);
> + if (ret) {
> + dev_err(dev, "failed to get reg property\n");
> + return ret;
> + }
> +
> + /*
> + * Remote processor can address only 32 bits
> + * so convert 64-bits into 32-bits. This will discard
> + * any unwanted upper 32-bits.
> + */
> + tcm->da = (u32)abs_addr;
> + tcm->size = (u32)size;
> +
> + cpdev = to_platform_device(dev);
> + res = platform_get_resource(cpdev, IORESOURCE_MEM, j);
> + if (!res) {
> + dev_err(dev, "failed to get tcm resource\n");
> + return -EINVAL;
> + }
> +
> + tcm->addr = (u32)res->start;
> + tcm->bank_name = (char *)res->name;
> + res = devm_request_mem_region(dev, tcm->addr, tcm->size,
> + tcm->bank_name);
> + if (!res) {
> + dev_err(dev, "failed to request tcm
> resource\n");
> + return -EINVAL;
> + }
> + }
> + }
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> /**
> * zynqmp_r5_get_tcm_node()
> * Ideally this function should parse tcm node and store information
> @@ -835,9 +932,14 @@ static int zynqmp_r5_core_init(struct zynqmp_r5_cluster
> *cluster,
> struct zynqmp_r5_core *r5_core;
> int ret, i;
>
> - ret = zynqmp_r5_get_tcm_node(cluster);
> - if (ret < 0) {
> - dev_err(dev, "can't get tcm node, err %d\n", ret);
> + r5_core = cluster->r5_cores[0];
> + if (of_find_property(r5_core->np, "reg", NULL))
> + ret = zynqmp_r5_get_tcm_node_from_dt(cluster);
> + else
> + ret = zynqmp_r5_get_tcm_node(cluster);
> +
> + if (ret) {
> + dev_err(dev, "can't get tcm, err %d\n", ret);
> return ret;
> }
>
> --
> 2.25.1
>
