Le 15/04/2020 à 17:24, Wang Wenhu a écrit :
A driver for freescale 85xx platforms to access the Cache-Sram form
user level. This is extremely helpful for some user-space applications
that require high performance memory accesses.

Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gre...@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc: Christophe Leroy <christophe.le...@c-s.fr>
Cc: Scott Wood <o...@buserror.net>
Cc: Michael Ellerman <m...@ellerman.id.au>
Cc: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
Signed-off-by: Wang Wenhu <wenhu.w...@vivo.com>
---
Changes since v1:
  * Addressed comments of Greg K-H
  * Moved kfree(info->name) into uio_info_free_internal()
---
  drivers/uio/Kconfig                   |   8 ++
  drivers/uio/Makefile                  |   1 +
  drivers/uio/uio_fsl_85xx_cache_sram.c | 182 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++
  3 files changed, 191 insertions(+)
  create mode 100644 drivers/uio/uio_fsl_85xx_cache_sram.c

diff --git a/drivers/uio/Kconfig b/drivers/uio/Kconfig
index 202ee81cfc2b..afd38ec13de0 100644
--- a/drivers/uio/Kconfig
+++ b/drivers/uio/Kconfig
@@ -105,6 +105,14 @@ config UIO_NETX
          To compile this driver as a module, choose M here; the module
          will be called uio_netx.
+config UIO_FSL_85XX_CACHE_SRAM
+       tristate "Freescale 85xx Cache-Sram driver"
+       depends on FSL_85XX_CACHE_SRAM

Is there any point having FSL_85XX_CACHE_SRAM without this ?

Should it be the other way round, leave FSL_85XX_CACHE_SRAM unselectable by user, and this driver select FSL_85XX_CACHE_SRAM instead of depending on it ?

+       help
+         Generic driver for accessing the Cache-Sram form user level. This
+         is extremely helpful for some user-space applications that require
+         high performance memory accesses.
+
  config UIO_FSL_ELBC_GPCM
        tristate "eLBC/GPCM driver"
        depends on FSL_LBC
diff --git a/drivers/uio/Makefile b/drivers/uio/Makefile
index c285dd2a4539..be2056cffc21 100644
--- a/drivers/uio/Makefile
+++ b/drivers/uio/Makefile
@@ -10,4 +10,5 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_UIO_NETX)        += uio_netx.o
  obj-$(CONFIG_UIO_PRUSS)         += uio_pruss.o
  obj-$(CONFIG_UIO_MF624)         += uio_mf624.o
  obj-$(CONFIG_UIO_FSL_ELBC_GPCM)       += uio_fsl_elbc_gpcm.o
+obj-$(CONFIG_UIO_FSL_85XX_CACHE_SRAM)  += uio_fsl_85xx_cache_sram.o
  obj-$(CONFIG_UIO_HV_GENERIC)  += uio_hv_generic.o
diff --git a/drivers/uio/uio_fsl_85xx_cache_sram.c 
b/drivers/uio/uio_fsl_85xx_cache_sram.c
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..fb6903fdaddb
--- /dev/null
+++ b/drivers/uio/uio_fsl_85xx_cache_sram.c
@@ -0,0 +1,182 @@
+// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
+/*
+ * Copyright (C) 2020 Vivo Communication Technology Co. Ltd.
+ * Copyright (C) 2020 Wang Wenhu <wenhu.w...@vivo.com>
+ * All rights reserved.
+ */
+
+#include <linux/platform_device.h>
+#include <linux/uio_driver.h>
+#include <linux/stringify.h>
+#include <linux/module.h>
+#include <linux/kernel.h>
+#include <asm/fsl_85xx_cache_sram.h>
+
+#define DRIVER_NAME    "uio_fsl_85xx_cache_sram"
+#define UIO_NAME       "uio_cache_sram"
+
+static const struct of_device_id uio_mpc85xx_l2ctlr_of_match[] = {
+       {       .compatible = "uio,fsl,p2020-l2-cache-controller",    },
+       {       .compatible = "uio,fsl,p2010-l2-cache-controller",    },
+       {       .compatible = "uio,fsl,p1020-l2-cache-controller",    },
+       {       .compatible = "uio,fsl,p1011-l2-cache-controller",    },
+       {       .compatible = "uio,fsl,p1013-l2-cache-controller",    },
+       {       .compatible = "uio,fsl,p1022-l2-cache-controller",    },
+       {       .compatible = "uio,fsl,mpc8548-l2-cache-controller",  },
+       {       .compatible = "uio,fsl,mpc8544-l2-cache-controller",  },
+       {       .compatible = "uio,fsl,mpc8572-l2-cache-controller",  },
+       {       .compatible = "uio,fsl,mpc8536-l2-cache-controller",  },
+       {       .compatible = "uio,fsl,p1021-l2-cache-controller",    },
+       {       .compatible = "uio,fsl,p1012-l2-cache-controller",    },
+       {       .compatible = "uio,fsl,p1025-l2-cache-controller",    },
+       {       .compatible = "uio,fsl,p1016-l2-cache-controller",    },
+       {       .compatible = "uio,fsl,p1024-l2-cache-controller",    },
+       {       .compatible = "uio,fsl,p1015-l2-cache-controller",    },
+       {       .compatible = "uio,fsl,p1010-l2-cache-controller",    },
+       {       .compatible = "uio,fsl,bsc9131-l2-cache-controller",  },
+       {},
+};
+
+static void uio_info_free_internal(struct uio_info *info)
+{
+       struct uio_mem *uiomem = &info->mem[0];
+
+       while (uiomem < &info->mem[MAX_UIO_MAPS]) {
+               if (uiomem->size) {
+                       mpc85xx_cache_sram_free(uiomem->internal_addr);
+                       kfree(uiomem->name);
+               }
+               uiomem++;
+       }
+
+       kfree(info->name);
+}
+
+static int uio_fsl_85xx_cache_sram_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
+{
+       struct device_node *parent = pdev->dev.of_node;
+       struct device_node *node = NULL;
+       struct uio_info *info;
+       struct uio_mem *uiomem;
+       const char *dt_name;
+       u32 mem_size;
+       u32 align;

Align is not used outside of the for loop, it should be declared in the loop block.

+       void *virt;

Same for virt

+       phys_addr_t phys;

Same for phys

+       int ret = -ENODEV;

It looks like this init value is unneeded, you should leave 'ret' uninitialised (unless I missed some way out and you get a warning).

+
+       /* alloc uio_info for one device */
+       info = kzalloc(sizeof(*info), GFP_KERNEL);
+       if (!info) {
+               ret = -ENOMEM;
+               goto err_out;

Nothing special is done at err_out, you should instead do:

        if (!info)
                return -ENOMEM;

+       }
+
+       /* get optional uio name */
+       if (of_property_read_string(parent, "uio_name", &dt_name))
+               dt_name = UIO_NAME;
+
+       info->name = kstrdup(dt_name, GFP_KERNEL);
+       if (!info->name) {
+               ret = -ENOMEM;
+               goto err_info_free;
+       }
+
+       uiomem = &info->mem[0];

I'd prefer
        uiomem = info->mem;

+       for_each_child_of_node(parent, node) {
+               ret = of_property_read_u32(node, "cache-mem-size", &mem_size);
+               if (ret) {
+                       ret = -EINVAL;
+                       goto err_info_free_internel;
+               }
+
+               if (mem_size == 0) {
+                       dev_err(&pdev->dev, "cache-mem-size should not be 0\n");
+                       ret = -EINVAL;
+                       goto err_info_free_internel;
+               }
+
+               align = 2;
+               while (align < mem_size)
+                       align *= 2;

I think ilog2() or one of it friends should be used here, maybe roundup_pow_of_two()

+               virt = mpc85xx_cache_sram_alloc(mem_size, &phys, align);
+               if (!virt) {
+                       /* mpc85xx_cache_sram_alloc to define the cause */
+                       ret = -EINVAL;

Should it be -ENOMEM like any allocation failure ?

+                       goto err_info_free_internel;
+               }
+
+               uiomem->memtype = UIO_MEM_PHYS;
+               uiomem->addr = phys;
+               uiomem->size = mem_size;
+               uiomem->name = kstrdup(node->name, GFP_KERNEL);;
+               uiomem->internal_addr = virt;
+               ++uiomem;

Usually people use

        uiomem++;

+
+               if (uiomem >= &info->mem[MAX_UIO_MAPS]) {

I'd prefer
                if (uiomem - info->mem >= MAX_UIO_MAPS) {

+                       dev_warn(&pdev->dev, "more than %d uio-maps for 
device.\n",
+                                MAX_UIO_MAPS);
+                       break;
+               }
+       }
+
+       while (uiomem < &info->mem[MAX_UIO_MAPS]) {

I'd prefer

        while (uiomem - info->mem < MAX_UIO_MAPS) {

+               uiomem->size = 0;
+               ++uiomem;
+       }
+
+       if (info->mem[0].size == 0) {

Is there any point in doing all the clearing loop above if it's to bail out here ?

Wouldn't it be cleaner to do the test above the clearing loop, by just checking whether uiomem is still equal to info->mem ?

+               dev_err(&pdev->dev, "error no valid uio-map configured\n");
+               ret = -EINVAL;
+               goto err_info_free_internel;
+       }
+
+       info->version = "0.1.0";

Could you define some DRIVER_VERSION in the top of the file next to DRIVER_NAME instead of hard coding in the middle on a function ?

+
+       /* register uio device */
+       if (uio_register_device(&pdev->dev, info)) {
+               dev_err(&pdev->dev, "uio registration failed\n");
+               ret = -ENODEV;
+               goto err_info_free_internel;
+       }
+
+       platform_set_drvdata(pdev, info);
+
+       return 0;
+err_info_free_internel:

Do you mean 'internal' instead of 'internel' ?

+       uio_info_free_internal(info);
+err_info_free:
+       kfree(info);
+err_out:
+       return ret;
+}
+
+static int uio_fsl_85xx_cache_sram_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
+{
+       struct uio_info *info = platform_get_drvdata(pdev);
+
+       uio_unregister_device(info);
+
+       uio_info_free_internal(info);
+
+       kfree(info);
+
+       return 0;
+}
+
+static struct platform_driver uio_fsl_85xx_cache_sram = {
+       .probe = uio_fsl_85xx_cache_sram_probe,
+       .remove = uio_fsl_85xx_cache_sram_remove,
+       .driver = {
+               .name = DRIVER_NAME,
+               .owner = THIS_MODULE,
+               .of_match_table = uio_mpc85xx_l2ctlr_of_match,
+       },
+};
+
+module_platform_driver(uio_fsl_85xx_cache_sram);
+
+MODULE_AUTHOR("Wang Wenhu <wenhu.w...@vivo.com>");
+MODULE_DESCRIPTION("Freescale MPC85xx Cache-Sram UIO Platform Driver");
+MODULE_ALIAS("platform:" DRIVER_NAME);
+MODULE_LICENSE("GPL v2");


Christophe

Reply via email to