On 3/20/25 10:14 AM, Ling Xu wrote:
> The fastrpc driver has support for 5 types of remoteprocs. There are
> some products which support GPDSP remoteprocs. Add changes to support
> GPDSP remoteprocs.
> 
> Reviewed-by: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.barysh...@oss.qualcomm.com>
> Signed-off-by: Ling Xu <quic_l...@quicinc.com>
> ---
>  drivers/misc/fastrpc.c | 10 ++++++++--
>  1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/misc/fastrpc.c b/drivers/misc/fastrpc.c
> index 7b7a22c91fe4..80aa554b3042 100644
> --- a/drivers/misc/fastrpc.c
> +++ b/drivers/misc/fastrpc.c
> @@ -28,7 +28,9 @@
>  #define SDSP_DOMAIN_ID (2)
>  #define CDSP_DOMAIN_ID (3)
>  #define CDSP1_DOMAIN_ID (4)
> -#define FASTRPC_DEV_MAX              5 /* adsp, mdsp, slpi, cdsp, cdsp1 */
> +#define GDSP0_DOMAIN_ID (5)
> +#define GDSP1_DOMAIN_ID (6)
> +#define FASTRPC_DEV_MAX              7 /* adsp, mdsp, slpi, cdsp, cdsp1, 
> gdsp0, gdsp1 */
>  #define FASTRPC_MAX_SESSIONS 14
>  #define FASTRPC_MAX_VMIDS    16
>  #define FASTRPC_ALIGN                128
> @@ -107,7 +109,9 @@
>  #define miscdev_to_fdevice(d) container_of(d, struct fastrpc_device, miscdev)
>  
>  static const char *domains[FASTRPC_DEV_MAX] = { "adsp", "mdsp",
> -                                             "sdsp", "cdsp", "cdsp1" };
> +                                             "sdsp", "cdsp",
> +                                             "cdsp1", "gdsp0",
> +                                             "gdsp1" };
>  struct fastrpc_phy_page {
>       u64 addr;               /* physical address */
>       u64 size;               /* size of contiguous region */
> @@ -2338,6 +2342,8 @@ static int fastrpc_rpmsg_probe(struct rpmsg_device 
> *rpdev)
>               break;
>       case CDSP_DOMAIN_ID:
>       case CDSP1_DOMAIN_ID:
> +     case GDSP0_DOMAIN_ID:
> +     case GDSP1_DOMAIN_ID:
>               data->unsigned_support = true;

There's a comment above this hunk that is no longer valid:

'/* Unsigned PD offloading is only supported on CDSP and CDSP1 */'

I would say it can be removed altogether

I would also support renaming "unsigned_support" which is very generic to
something like allow_unsigned_pds

Konrad

Reply via email to