On 4/22/25 12:49 PM, Mathieu Poirier wrote:
On Tue, 22 Apr 2025 at 10:10, Tanmay Shah <[email protected]> wrote:
On 4/22/25 10:59 AM, Mathieu Poirier wrote:
Good morning,
On Mon, Apr 14, 2025 at 11:46:01AM -0700, Tanmay Shah wrote:
Powering off RPU using force_pwrdwn call results in system failure
if there are multiple users of that RPU node. Better mechanism is to use
request_node and release_node EEMI calls. With use of these EEMI calls,
platform management controller will take-care of powering off RPU
when there is no user.
Signed-off-by: Tanmay Shah <[email protected]>
---
drivers/remoteproc/xlnx_r5_remoteproc.c | 29 ++++++++++++++++++++++++-
1 file changed, 28 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/xlnx_r5_remoteproc.c
b/drivers/remoteproc/xlnx_r5_remoteproc.c
index 5aeedeaf3c41..3597359c0fc8 100644
--- a/drivers/remoteproc/xlnx_r5_remoteproc.c
+++ b/drivers/remoteproc/xlnx_r5_remoteproc.c
@@ -380,6 +380,18 @@ static int zynqmp_r5_rproc_start(struct rproc *rproc)
dev_dbg(r5_core->dev, "RPU boot addr 0x%llx from %s.", rproc->bootaddr,
bootmem == PM_RPU_BOOTMEM_HIVEC ? "OCM" : "TCM");
+ /* Request node before starting RPU core if new version of API is
supported */
+ if (zynqmp_pm_feature(PM_REQUEST_NODE) > 1) {
+ ret = zynqmp_pm_request_node(r5_core->pm_domain_id,
+ ZYNQMP_PM_CAPABILITY_ACCESS, 0,
+ ZYNQMP_PM_REQUEST_ACK_BLOCKING);
+ if (ret < 0) {
+ dev_err(r5_core->dev, "failed to request 0x%x",
+ r5_core->pm_domain_id);
+ return ret;
+ }
+ }
+
ret = zynqmp_pm_request_wake(r5_core->pm_domain_id, 1,
bootmem, ZYNQMP_PM_REQUEST_ACK_NO);
if (ret)
@@ -401,10 +413,25 @@ static int zynqmp_r5_rproc_stop(struct rproc *rproc)
struct zynqmp_r5_core *r5_core = rproc->priv;
int ret;
+ /* Use release node API to stop core if new version of API is supported */
+ if (zynqmp_pm_feature(PM_RELEASE_NODE) > 1) {
+ ret = zynqmp_pm_release_node(r5_core->pm_domain_id);
+ if (ret)
+ dev_err(r5_core->dev, "failed to stop remoteproc RPU
%d\n", ret);
+ return ret;
+ }
+
+ if (zynqmp_pm_feature(PM_FORCE_POWERDOWN) < 1) {
+ dev_dbg(r5_core->dev, "EEMI interface %d not supported\n",
+ PM_FORCE_POWERDOWN);
+ return -EOPNOTSUPP;
+ }
Here I have to guess, because it is not documented, that it is the check to see
if zynqmp_pm_force_pwrdwn() is available. I'm not sure why it is needed because
zynqmp_pm_force_pwrdwn() returns and error code.
Hello,
Thanks for reviews. Yes you are correct. Actually instead, the check
should be for version 1 of PM_FORCE_POWER_DOWN. If version 1 is
supported, only then execute the call otherwise print the error.
Hence, the check should be something like:
if (zynqmp_pm_feature(PM_FORCE_POWERDOWN) != 1) {
error out.
}
The above still doesn't answer my question, i.e _why_ is a check
needed when zynqmp_pm_force_pwrdwn() returns an error code? To me, if
something happens in zynqmp_pm_force_pwrdwn() then an error code is
reported and the current implementation is able to deal with it.
PM_FORCE_POWERDOWN will print redundant error messages from firmware if
called for feature that is not supported. By doing above version check,
we are avoiding those unnecessary error/warning messages. Other than
that, you are correct we don't need to do version check as
PM_FORCE_POWERDOWN will send respective error code and we will fail
here. But version check helps to differentiate between actual error log
from firmware when call is expected to work.
I will fix and add comment as well.
Thanks,
Mathieu
+
+ /* maintain force pwr down for backward compatibility */
ret = zynqmp_pm_force_pwrdwn(r5_core->pm_domain_id,
ZYNQMP_PM_REQUEST_ACK_BLOCKING);
if (ret)
- dev_err(r5_core->dev, "failed to stop remoteproc RPU %d\n", ret);
+ dev_err(r5_core->dev, "core force power down failed\n");
return ret;
}
base-commit: 8532691d0a85ab2a826808207e904f7d62a9d804
--
2.34.1
