From: Richard Genoud <richard.genoud@bootlin.com>
To: Bjorn Andersson <andersson@kernel.org>,
Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@linaro.org>
Cc: "Philipp Zabel" <p.zabel@pengutronix.de>,
"Suman Anna" <s-anna@ti.com>,
"Thomas Petazzoni" <thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com>,
"Alexandre Belloni" <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>,
"Udit Kumar" <u-kumar1@ti.com>,
"Thomas Richard" <thomas.richard@bootlin.com>,
"Gregory CLEMENT" <gregory.clement@bootlin.com>,
"Hari Nagalla" <hnagalla@ti.com>,
"Théo Lebrun" <theo.lebrun@bootlin.com>,
linux-remoteproc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
"Richard Genoud" <richard.genoud@bootlin.com>
Subject: [PATCH 1/4] remoteproc: k3-r5: Fix IPC-only mode detection
Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2024 17:00:55 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240621150058.319524-2-richard.genoud@bootlin.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240621150058.319524-1-richard.genoud@bootlin.com>
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.
Fixes: 1168af40b1ad ("remoteproc: k3-r5: Add support for IPC-only mode for all R5Fs")
Signed-off-by: Richard Genoud <richard.genoud@bootlin.com>
---
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;
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-06-21 15:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-06-21 15:00 [PATCH 0/4] remoteproc: k3-r5: Introduce suspend to ram support Richard Genoud
2024-06-21 15:00 ` Richard Genoud [this message]
2024-06-28 19:53 ` [PATCH 1/4] remoteproc: k3-r5: Fix IPC-only mode detection Mathieu Poirier
2024-06-28 19:58 ` Mathieu Poirier
2024-07-01 9:13 ` Hari Nagalla
2024-07-01 16:38 ` Mathieu Poirier
2024-06-21 15:00 ` [PATCH 2/4] remoteproc: k3-r5: Introduce PM suspend/resume handlers Richard Genoud
2024-06-28 20:48 ` Mathieu Poirier
2024-07-01 7:30 ` Richard GENOUD
2024-07-01 19:02 ` kernel test robot
2024-06-21 15:00 ` [PATCH 3/4] remoteproc: k3-r5: k3_r5_rproc_stop: code reorder Richard Genoud
2024-06-28 21:18 ` Mathieu Poirier
2024-07-01 8:03 ` Richard GENOUD
2024-07-01 16:35 ` Mathieu Poirier
2024-07-01 16:49 ` Richard GENOUD
2024-06-21 15:00 ` [PATCH 4/4] remoteproc: k3-r5: support for graceful stop of remote cores Richard Genoud
2024-06-28 21:20 ` Mathieu Poirier
2024-07-01 16:38 ` Richard GENOUD
2024-06-28 22:50 ` Andrew Davis
2024-07-01 16:48 ` Richard GENOUD
2024-07-01 21:55 ` kernel test robot
2024-06-28 21:23 ` [PATCH 0/4] remoteproc: k3-r5: Introduce suspend to ram support Mathieu Poirier
2024-07-01 9:59 ` Hari Nagalla
2024-07-08 7:33 ` Richard GENOUD
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20240621150058.319524-2-richard.genoud@bootlin.com \
--to=richard.genoud@bootlin.com \
--cc=alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com \
--cc=andersson@kernel.org \
--cc=gregory.clement@bootlin.com \
--cc=hnagalla@ti.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-remoteproc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mathieu.poirier@linaro.org \
--cc=p.zabel@pengutronix.de \
--cc=s-anna@ti.com \
--cc=theo.lebrun@bootlin.com \
--cc=thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com \
--cc=thomas.richard@bootlin.com \
--cc=u-kumar1@ti.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).