Re: [PATCH v9 02/26] remoteproc: k3-r5: Refactor Data Structures to Align with DSP and M4
From: Beleswar Prasad Padhi
Date: Tue Apr 08 2025 - 04:29:06 EST
On 07/04/25 19:03, Andrew Davis wrote:
On 3/17/25 7:05 AM, Beleswar Padhi wrote:
Currently, struct members such as mem, num_mems, reset, tsp, ti_sci and
ti_sci_id are part of the k3_r5_core structure. To align the rproc->priv
data structure of the R5 remote processor with that of the DSP and M4,
move the above members from k3_r5_core to k3_r5_rproc.
Additionally, introduce a void *priv pointer in k3_r5_rproc that can be
typecasted to point to the k3_r5_core structure. This abstraction is
done to ensure common functionalities across R5, DSP and M4 drivers can
be refactored at a later stage.
Signed-off-by: Beleswar Padhi <b-padhi@xxxxxx>
---
drivers/remoteproc/ti_k3_r5_remoteproc.c | 381 ++++++++++++-----------
1 file changed, 198 insertions(+), 183 deletions(-)
[... snip ...]
@@ -1284,6 +1290,7 @@ static int k3_r5_cluster_rproc_init(struct
platform_device *pdev)
struct device *dev = &pdev->dev;
struct k3_r5_rproc *kproc;
struct k3_r5_core *core, *core1;
+ struct device_node *np;
struct device *cdev;
const char *fw_name;
struct rproc *rproc;
@@ -1292,6 +1299,7 @@ static int k3_r5_cluster_rproc_init(struct
platform_device *pdev)
core1 = list_last_entry(&cluster->cores, struct k3_r5_core, elem);
list_for_each_entry(core, &cluster->cores, elem) {
cdev = core->dev;
+ np = dev_of_node(cdev);
ret = rproc_of_parse_firmware(cdev, 0, &fw_name);
if (ret) {
dev_err(dev, "failed to parse firmware-name property,
ret = %d\n",
@@ -1312,11 +1320,63 @@ static int k3_r5_cluster_rproc_init(struct
platform_device *pdev)
rproc->recovery_disabled = true;
kproc = rproc->priv;
- kproc->cluster = cluster;
- kproc->core = core;
+ kproc->priv = core;
kproc->dev = cdev;
kproc->rproc = rproc;
- core->rproc = rproc;
+ core->kproc = kproc;
+
+ kproc->ti_sci = devm_ti_sci_get_by_phandle(cdev, "ti,sci");
+ if (IS_ERR(kproc->ti_sci)) {
+ ret = dev_err_probe(cdev, PTR_ERR(kproc->ti_sci),
+ "failed to get ti-sci handle\n");
+ kproc->ti_sci = NULL;
+ goto out;
+ }
+
+ ret = of_property_read_u32(np, "ti,sci-dev-id",
&kproc->ti_sci_id);
+ if (ret) {
+ dev_err(cdev, "missing 'ti,sci-dev-id' property\n");
+ goto out;
+ }
+
+ kproc->reset = devm_reset_control_get_exclusive(cdev, NULL);
+ if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(kproc->reset)) {
+ ret = PTR_ERR_OR_ZERO(kproc->reset);
+ if (!ret)
+ ret = -ENODEV;
+ dev_err_probe(cdev, ret, "failed to get reset handle\n");
+ goto out;
+ }
+
+ kproc->tsp = ti_sci_proc_of_get_tsp(cdev, kproc->ti_sci);
+ if (IS_ERR(kproc->tsp)) {
+ ret = dev_err_probe(cdev, PTR_ERR(kproc->tsp),
+ "failed to construct ti-sci proc control\n");
+ goto out;
+ }
+
+ ret =
k3_r5_core_of_get_internal_memories(to_platform_device(cdev), kproc);
+ if (ret) {
+ dev_err(cdev, "failed to get internal memories, ret =
%d\n",
+ ret);
+ goto out;
+ }
+
+ ret = ti_sci_proc_request(kproc->tsp);
+ if (ret < 0) {
+ dev_err(cdev, "ti_sci_proc_request failed, ret = %d\n",
ret);
+ goto out;
+ }
+
+ ret = devm_add_action_or_reset(cdev, k3_r5_release_tsp,
kproc->tsp);
+ if (ret)
+ goto out;
+ }
+
+ list_for_each_entry(core, &cluster->cores, elem) {
+ cdev = core->dev;
+ kproc = core->kproc;
+ rproc = kproc->rproc;
ret = k3_r5_rproc_request_mbox(rproc);
if (ret)
@@ -1330,7 +1390,7 @@ static int k3_r5_cluster_rproc_init(struct
platform_device *pdev)
ret = k3_r5_rproc_configure(kproc);
if (ret) {
- dev_err(dev, "initial configure failed, ret = %d\n",
+ dev_err(cdev, "initial configure failed, ret = %d\n",
ret);
goto out;
}
@@ -1340,14 +1400,14 @@ static int k3_r5_cluster_rproc_init(struct
platform_device *pdev)
ret = k3_r5_reserved_mem_init(kproc);
if (ret) {
- dev_err(dev, "reserved memory init failed, ret = %d\n",
+ dev_err(cdev, "reserved memory init failed, ret = %d\n",
ret);
goto out;
}
- ret = devm_rproc_add(dev, rproc);
+ ret = devm_rproc_add(cdev, rproc);
if (ret) {
- dev_err_probe(dev, ret, "rproc_add failed\n");
+ dev_err_probe(cdev, ret, "rproc_add failed\n");
goto out;
}
@@ -1373,7 +1433,7 @@ static int k3_r5_cluster_rproc_init(struct
platform_device *pdev)
core->released_from_reset,
msecs_to_jiffies(2000));
if (ret <= 0) {
- dev_err(dev,
+ dev_err(cdev,
"Timed out waiting for %s core to power up!\n",
rproc->name);
goto out;
@@ -1396,8 +1456,8 @@ static int k3_r5_cluster_rproc_init(struct
platform_device *pdev)
/* undo core0 upon any failures on core1 in split-mode */
if (cluster->mode == CLUSTER_MODE_SPLIT && core == core1) {
core = list_prev_entry(core, elem);
- rproc = core->rproc;
- kproc = rproc->priv;
+ kproc = core->kproc;
+ rproc = kproc->rproc;
goto err_split;
}
return ret;
@@ -1422,8 +1482,8 @@ static void k3_r5_cluster_rproc_exit(void *data)
list_last_entry(&cluster->cores, struct k3_r5_core, elem);
list_for_each_entry_from_reverse(core, &cluster->cores, elem) {
- rproc = core->rproc;
- kproc = rproc->priv;
+ kproc = core->kproc;
+ rproc = kproc->rproc;
if (rproc->state == RPROC_ATTACHED) {
ret = rproc_detach(rproc);
@@ -1539,58 +1599,12 @@ static int k3_r5_core_of_init(struct
platform_device *pdev)
goto err;
}
- core->ti_sci = devm_ti_sci_get_by_phandle(dev, "ti,sci");
- if (IS_ERR(core->ti_sci)) {
- ret = dev_err_probe(dev, PTR_ERR(core->ti_sci), "failed to
get ti-sci handle\n");
- core->ti_sci = NULL;
- goto err;
- }
-
- ret = of_property_read_u32(np, "ti,sci-dev-id", &core->ti_sci_id);
- if (ret) {
- dev_err(dev, "missing 'ti,sci-dev-id' property\n");
- goto err;
- }
-
- core->reset = devm_reset_control_get_exclusive(dev, NULL);
- if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(core->reset)) {
- ret = PTR_ERR_OR_ZERO(core->reset);
- if (!ret)
- ret = -ENODEV;
- dev_err_probe(dev, ret, "failed to get reset handle\n");
- goto err;
- }
-
- core->tsp = ti_sci_proc_of_get_tsp(dev, core->ti_sci);
- if (IS_ERR(core->tsp)) {
- ret = dev_err_probe(dev, PTR_ERR(core->tsp),
- "failed to construct ti-sci proc control\n");
- goto err;
- }
-
- ret = k3_r5_core_of_get_internal_memories(pdev, core);
- if (ret) {
- dev_err(dev, "failed to get internal memories, ret = %d\n",
- ret);
- goto err;
- }
-
Is there anyway to do this part of the refactor (moving all this up into
k3_r5_cluster_rproc_init()) as part of a pre-patch? Might make this patch
more readable.
Unfortunately not. We move the structure members around in this patch,
so we should also do the necessary code changes to work with updated
structure in the same patch. So this patch has to go around being a
lengthier one :(
Thanks,
Beleswar
Otherwise this all looks fine to me as it should be very mechanical
renaming
and moving variables around.
Andrew
[... snip ...]