I am sorry, I missed the fact that this patch was picked up and available on
for-next branch.
Won't be sending new one now.
Thanks,
Tanmay
On 2/7/24 4:18 PM, Tanmay Shah wrote:
> Rejected-by: Tanmay Shah <tanmay.s...@amd.com>
>
> I will send new v5 with change long included.
>
> On 1/30/24 9:48 AM, Tanmay Shah wrote:
> > From: Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poir...@linaro.org>
> >
> > Multi-cluster remoteproc designs typically have the following DT
> > declaration:
> >
> > remoteproc-cluster {
> > compatible = "soc,remoteproc-cluster";
> >
> > core0: core0 {
> > compatible = "soc,remoteproc-core"
> > memory-region;
> > sram;
> > };
> >
> > core1: core1 {
> > compatible = "soc,remoteproc-core"
> > memory-region;
> > sram;
> > }
> > };
> >
> > A driver exists for the cluster rather than the individual cores
> > themselves so that operation mode and HW specific configurations
> > applicable to the cluster can be made.
> >
> > Because the driver exists at the cluster level and not the individual
> > core level, function rproc_get_by_phandle() fails to return the
> > remoteproc associated with the phandled it is called for.
> >
> > This patch enhances rproc_get_by_phandle() by looking for the cluster's
> > driver when the driver for the immediate remoteproc's parent is not
> > found.
> >
> > Reported-by: Ben Levinsky <ben.levin...@xilinx.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poir...@linaro.org>
> > Co-developed-by: Tarak Reddy <tarak.re...@amd.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Tarak Reddy <tarak.re...@amd.com>
> > Co-developed-by: Tanmay Shah <tanmay.s...@amd.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Tanmay Shah <tanmay.s...@amd.com>
> > ---
> > drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c | 29 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
> > 1 file changed, 27 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> > b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> > index 695cce218e8c..f276956f2c5c 100644
> > --- a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> > +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> > @@ -33,6 +33,7 @@
> > #include <linux/idr.h>
> > #include <linux/elf.h>
> > #include <linux/crc32.h>
> > +#include <linux/of_platform.h>
> > #include <linux/of_reserved_mem.h>
> > #include <linux/virtio_ids.h>
> > #include <linux/virtio_ring.h>
> > @@ -2112,6 +2113,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(rproc_detach);
> > struct rproc *rproc_get_by_phandle(phandle phandle)
> > {
> > struct rproc *rproc = NULL, *r;
> > + struct device_driver *driver;
> > struct device_node *np;
> >
> > np = of_find_node_by_phandle(phandle);
> > @@ -2122,7 +2124,26 @@ struct rproc *rproc_get_by_phandle(phandle phandle)
> > list_for_each_entry_rcu(r, &rproc_list, node) {
> > if (r->dev.parent && device_match_of_node(r->dev.parent, np)) {
> > /* prevent underlying implementation from being removed
> > */
> > - if (!try_module_get(r->dev.parent->driver->owner)) {
> > +
> > + /*
> > + * If the remoteproc's parent has a driver, the
> > + * remoteproc is not part of a cluster and we can use
> > + * that driver.
> > + */
> > + driver = r->dev.parent->driver;
> > +
> > + /*
> > + * If the remoteproc's parent does not have a driver,
> > + * look for the driver associated with the cluster.
> > + */
> > + if (!driver) {
> > + if (r->dev.parent->parent)
> > + driver = r->dev.parent->parent->driver;
> > + if (!driver)
> > + break;
> > + }
> > +
> > + if (!try_module_get(driver->owner)) {
> > dev_err(&r->dev, "can't get owner\n");
> > break;
> > }
> > @@ -2533,7 +2554,11 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(rproc_free);
> > */
> > void rproc_put(struct rproc *rproc)
> > {
> > - module_put(rproc->dev.parent->driver->owner);
> > + if (rproc->dev.parent->driver)
> > + module_put(rproc->dev.parent->driver->owner);
> > + else
> > + module_put(rproc->dev.parent->parent->driver->owner);
> > +
> > put_device(&rproc->dev);
> > }
> > EXPORT_SYMBOL(rproc_put);
> >
> > base-commit: 99f59b148871dadb9104366e3d25b120a97f897b
