MT8195 SCP is a dual-core processor. The mtk_scp.c driver only controls
SCP core 0. This patch adds a basic driver to control the another core.
Core 1 and core 0 of the SCP are housed in the same subsys.They see
registers and memory in the same way.
Core 1 of the SCP features its own set of core configuration registers,
interrupt controller, timers, and DMAs. The rest of the peripherals
in this subsystem are shared by core 0 and core 1.
As for memory, core 1 has its own cache memory, and the SCP SRAM is shared
by core 0 and core 1.
Signed-off-by: Tinghan Shen <tinghan.shen@mediatek.com>
---
drivers/remoteproc/Makefile | 1 +
drivers/remoteproc/mtk_scp_dual.c | 97 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
2 files changed, 98 insertions(+)
create mode 100644 drivers/remoteproc/mtk_scp_dual.c
diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/Makefile b/drivers/remoteproc/Makefile
index 5478c7cb9e07..84cb687d28da 100644
--- a/drivers/remoteproc/Makefile
+++ b/drivers/remoteproc/Makefile
@@ -15,6 +15,7 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_IMX_REMOTEPROC) += imx_rproc.o
obj-$(CONFIG_IMX_DSP_REMOTEPROC) += imx_dsp_rproc.o
obj-$(CONFIG_INGENIC_VPU_RPROC) += ingenic_rproc.o
obj-$(CONFIG_MTK_SCP) += mtk_scp.o mtk_scp_ipi.o
+obj-$(CONFIG_MTK_SCP_DUALCORE) += mtk_scp_dual.o
obj-$(CONFIG_OMAP_REMOTEPROC) += omap_remoteproc.o
obj-$(CONFIG_WKUP_M3_RPROC) += wkup_m3_rproc.o
obj-$(CONFIG_DA8XX_REMOTEPROC) += da8xx_remoteproc.o
diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/mtk_scp_dual.c b/drivers/remoteproc/mtk_scp_dual.c
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..7bc08d26f208
--- /dev/null
+++ b/drivers/remoteproc/mtk_scp_dual.c
@@ -0,0 +1,97 @@
+// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
+//
+// Copyright (c) 2022 MediaTek Inc.
+
+#include <linux/err.h>
+#include <linux/kernel.h>
+#include <linux/module.h>
+#include <linux/of_address.h>
+#include <linux/of_platform.h>
+#include <linux/platform_device.h>
+
+#include "mtk_common.h"
+#include "remoteproc_internal.h"
+
+static const struct rproc_ops scp_ops;
+
+static int scp_dual_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
+{
+ struct device *dev = &pdev->dev;
+ struct device_node *np = dev->of_node;
+ struct mtk_scp *scp;
+ struct rproc *rproc;
+ const char *fw_name = "scp-dual.img";
+ int ret, i;
+ struct resource *res;
+
+ ret = rproc_of_parse_firmware(dev, 0, &fw_name);
+ if (ret < 0 && ret != -EINVAL)
+ return ret;
+
+ rproc = devm_rproc_alloc(dev, np->name, &scp_ops, fw_name, sizeof(*scp));
+ if (!rproc) {
+ dev_err(dev, "unable to allocate remoteproc\n");
+ return -ENOMEM;
+ }
+
+ scp = (struct mtk_scp *)rproc->priv;
+ scp->rproc = rproc;
+ scp->dev = dev;
+ platform_set_drvdata(pdev, scp);
+
+ res = platform_get_resource_byname(pdev, IORESOURCE_MEM, "sram");
+ scp->sram_base = devm_ioremap(dev, res->start, resource_size(res));
+ if (IS_ERR(scp->sram_base))
+ return dev_err_probe(dev, PTR_ERR(scp->sram_base),
+ "Failed to parse and map sram memory\n");
+
+ scp->sram_size = resource_size(res);
+ scp->sram_phys = res->start;
+
+ res = platform_get_resource_byname(pdev, IORESOURCE_MEM, "cfg");
+ scp->reg_base = devm_ioremap(dev, res->start, resource_size(res));
+ if (IS_ERR(scp->reg_base))
+ return dev_err_probe(dev, PTR_ERR(scp->reg_base),
+ "Failed to parse and map cfg memory\n");
+
+ mutex_init(&scp->send_lock);
+ for (i = 0; i < SCP_IPI_MAX; i++)
+ mutex_init(&scp->ipi_desc[i].lock);
+
+ init_waitqueue_head(&scp->run.wq);
+ init_waitqueue_head(&scp->ack_wq);
+
+ return 0;
+}
+
+static int scp_dual_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
+{
+ struct mtk_scp *scp = platform_get_drvdata(pdev);
+ int i;
+
+ for (i = 0; i < SCP_IPI_MAX; i++)
+ mutex_destroy(&scp->ipi_desc[i].lock);
+ mutex_destroy(&scp->send_lock);
+
+ return 0;
+}
+
+static const struct of_device_id mtk_scp_dual_of_match[] = {
+ { .compatible = "mediatek,mt8195-scp-dual" },
+ {},
+};
+MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, mtk_scp_dual_of_match);
+
+static struct platform_driver mtk_scp_dual_driver = {
+ .probe = scp_dual_probe,
+ .remove = scp_dual_remove,
+ .driver = {
+ .name = "mtk-scp-dual",
+ .of_match_table = mtk_scp_dual_of_match,
+ },
+};
+
+module_platform_driver(mtk_scp_dual_driver);
+
+MODULE_LICENSE("GPL");
+MODULE_DESCRIPTION("MediaTek SCP dualcore control driver");
--
2.18.0Il 01/06/22 13:21, Tinghan Shen ha scritto:
> MT8195 SCP is a dual-core processor. The mtk_scp.c driver only controls
> SCP core 0. This patch adds a basic driver to control the another core.
>
> Core 1 and core 0 of the SCP are housed in the same subsys.They see
> registers and memory in the same way.
>
> Core 1 of the SCP features its own set of core configuration registers,
> interrupt controller, timers, and DMAs. The rest of the peripherals
> in this subsystem are shared by core 0 and core 1.
>
> As for memory, core 1 has its own cache memory, and the SCP SRAM is shared
> by core 0 and core 1.
>
Hello Tinghan,
checking all the patches that are introducing support for the secondary SCP core,
it's clear that you're practically reusing *most of* mtk_scp in mtk_scp_dual.
I don't think that adding a new configuration option for MTK_SCP_DUALCORE (nor a
new file just for that) is a good idea... the code is "short enough" so you should
really just add support for multi-core SCP in mtk_scp.c instead.
After doing so, I have a hunch that we'll be able to reduce the size of this
implementation even more, as I see literally too much common code :-)
Cheers,
Angelo
> Signed-off-by: Tinghan Shen <tinghan.shen@mediatek.com>
> ---
> drivers/remoteproc/Makefile | 1 +
> drivers/remoteproc/mtk_scp_dual.c | 97 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 2 files changed, 98 insertions(+)
> create mode 100644 drivers/remoteproc/mtk_scp_dual.c
>
> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/Makefile b/drivers/remoteproc/Makefile
> index 5478c7cb9e07..84cb687d28da 100644
> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/Makefile
> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/Makefile
> @@ -15,6 +15,7 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_IMX_REMOTEPROC) += imx_rproc.o
> obj-$(CONFIG_IMX_DSP_REMOTEPROC) += imx_dsp_rproc.o
> obj-$(CONFIG_INGENIC_VPU_RPROC) += ingenic_rproc.o
> obj-$(CONFIG_MTK_SCP) += mtk_scp.o mtk_scp_ipi.o
> +obj-$(CONFIG_MTK_SCP_DUALCORE) += mtk_scp_dual.o
> obj-$(CONFIG_OMAP_REMOTEPROC) += omap_remoteproc.o
> obj-$(CONFIG_WKUP_M3_RPROC) += wkup_m3_rproc.o
> obj-$(CONFIG_DA8XX_REMOTEPROC) += da8xx_remoteproc.o
> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/mtk_scp_dual.c b/drivers/remoteproc/mtk_scp_dual.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 000000000000..7bc08d26f208
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/mtk_scp_dual.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,97 @@
> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> +//
> +// Copyright (c) 2022 MediaTek Inc.
> +
> +#include <linux/err.h>
> +#include <linux/kernel.h>
> +#include <linux/module.h>
> +#include <linux/of_address.h>
> +#include <linux/of_platform.h>
> +#include <linux/platform_device.h>
> +
> +#include "mtk_common.h"
> +#include "remoteproc_internal.h"
> +
> +static const struct rproc_ops scp_ops;
> +
> +static int scp_dual_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> +{
> + struct device *dev = &pdev->dev;
> + struct device_node *np = dev->of_node;
> + struct mtk_scp *scp;
> + struct rproc *rproc;
> + const char *fw_name = "scp-dual.img";
> + int ret, i;
> + struct resource *res;
> +
> + ret = rproc_of_parse_firmware(dev, 0, &fw_name);
> + if (ret < 0 && ret != -EINVAL)
> + return ret;
> +
> + rproc = devm_rproc_alloc(dev, np->name, &scp_ops, fw_name, sizeof(*scp));
> + if (!rproc) {
> + dev_err(dev, "unable to allocate remoteproc\n");
> + return -ENOMEM;
> + }
> +
> + scp = (struct mtk_scp *)rproc->priv;
> + scp->rproc = rproc;
> + scp->dev = dev;
> + platform_set_drvdata(pdev, scp);
> +
> + res = platform_get_resource_byname(pdev, IORESOURCE_MEM, "sram");
> + scp->sram_base = devm_ioremap(dev, res->start, resource_size(res));
> + if (IS_ERR(scp->sram_base))
> + return dev_err_probe(dev, PTR_ERR(scp->sram_base),
> + "Failed to parse and map sram memory\n");
> +
> + scp->sram_size = resource_size(res);
> + scp->sram_phys = res->start;
> +
> + res = platform_get_resource_byname(pdev, IORESOURCE_MEM, "cfg");
> + scp->reg_base = devm_ioremap(dev, res->start, resource_size(res));
> + if (IS_ERR(scp->reg_base))
> + return dev_err_probe(dev, PTR_ERR(scp->reg_base),
> + "Failed to parse and map cfg memory\n");
> +
> + mutex_init(&scp->send_lock);
> + for (i = 0; i < SCP_IPI_MAX; i++)
> + mutex_init(&scp->ipi_desc[i].lock);
> +
> + init_waitqueue_head(&scp->run.wq);
> + init_waitqueue_head(&scp->ack_wq);
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int scp_dual_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
> +{
> + struct mtk_scp *scp = platform_get_drvdata(pdev);
> + int i;
> +
> + for (i = 0; i < SCP_IPI_MAX; i++)
> + mutex_destroy(&scp->ipi_desc[i].lock);
> + mutex_destroy(&scp->send_lock);
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static const struct of_device_id mtk_scp_dual_of_match[] = {
> + { .compatible = "mediatek,mt8195-scp-dual" },
> + {},
> +};
> +MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, mtk_scp_dual_of_match);
> +
> +static struct platform_driver mtk_scp_dual_driver = {
> + .probe = scp_dual_probe,
> + .remove = scp_dual_remove,
> + .driver = {
> + .name = "mtk-scp-dual",
> + .of_match_table = mtk_scp_dual_of_match,
> + },
> +};
> +
> +module_platform_driver(mtk_scp_dual_driver);
> +
> +MODULE_LICENSE("GPL");
> +MODULE_DESCRIPTION("MediaTek SCP dualcore control driver");
On Mon, 2022-06-06 at 11:15 +0200, AngeloGioacchino Del Regno wrote: > Il 01/06/22 13:21, Tinghan Shen ha scritto: > > MT8195 SCP is a dual-core processor. The mtk_scp.c driver only controls > > SCP core 0. This patch adds a basic driver to control the another core. > > > > Core 1 and core 0 of the SCP are housed in the same subsys.They see > > registers and memory in the same way. > > > > Core 1 of the SCP features its own set of core configuration registers, > > interrupt controller, timers, and DMAs. The rest of the peripherals > > in this subsystem are shared by core 0 and core 1. > > > > As for memory, core 1 has its own cache memory, and the SCP SRAM is shared > > by core 0 and core 1. > > > > Hello Tinghan, > > checking all the patches that are introducing support for the secondary SCP core, > it's clear that you're practically reusing *most of* mtk_scp in mtk_scp_dual. > > I don't think that adding a new configuration option for MTK_SCP_DUALCORE (nor a > new file just for that) is a good idea... the code is "short enough" so you should > really just add support for multi-core SCP in mtk_scp.c instead. > > After doing so, I have a hunch that we'll be able to reduce the size of this > implementation even more, as I see literally too much common code :-) > Hi Angelo, Thanks for your review. This series has 2 new files, mtk_scp_dual.c and mtk_scp_subdev.c. Is your advice to merge both files into mtk_scp.c, or to merely merge mtk_scp_dual.c to mtk_scp.c? Thanks, TingHan
Il 06/06/22 11:52, Tinghan Shen ha scritto: > On Mon, 2022-06-06 at 11:15 +0200, AngeloGioacchino Del Regno wrote: >> Il 01/06/22 13:21, Tinghan Shen ha scritto: >>> MT8195 SCP is a dual-core processor. The mtk_scp.c driver only controls >>> SCP core 0. This patch adds a basic driver to control the another core. >>> >>> Core 1 and core 0 of the SCP are housed in the same subsys.They see >>> registers and memory in the same way. >>> >>> Core 1 of the SCP features its own set of core configuration registers, >>> interrupt controller, timers, and DMAs. The rest of the peripherals >>> in this subsystem are shared by core 0 and core 1. >>> >>> As for memory, core 1 has its own cache memory, and the SCP SRAM is shared >>> by core 0 and core 1. >>> >> >> Hello Tinghan, >> >> checking all the patches that are introducing support for the secondary SCP core, >> it's clear that you're practically reusing *most of* mtk_scp in mtk_scp_dual. >> >> I don't think that adding a new configuration option for MTK_SCP_DUALCORE (nor a >> new file just for that) is a good idea... the code is "short enough" so you should >> really just add support for multi-core SCP in mtk_scp.c instead. >> >> After doing so, I have a hunch that we'll be able to reduce the size of this >> implementation even more, as I see literally too much common code :-) >> > > Hi Angelo, > > Thanks for your review. > > This series has 2 new files, mtk_scp_dual.c and mtk_scp_subdev.c. > Is your advice to merge both files into mtk_scp.c, > or to merely merge mtk_scp_dual.c to mtk_scp.c? > > Thanks, > TingHan > > > I suggest to merge both into mtk_scp.c and commonize/generalize functions inside of there as much as possible... including the removal of #if IS_ENABLED(...) macro usages, as you can simply check that during runtime by setting a bool variable to true when it's dual-core. Let's do this first step. I'll give you a more exhaustive review on v2, when this main step is done. Cheers, Angelo
On Mon, 2022-06-06 at 12:08 +0200, AngeloGioacchino Del Regno wrote: > Il 06/06/22 11:52, Tinghan Shen ha scritto: > > On Mon, 2022-06-06 at 11:15 +0200, AngeloGioacchino Del Regno wrote: > > > Il 01/06/22 13:21, Tinghan Shen ha scritto: > > > > MT8195 SCP is a dual-core processor. The mtk_scp.c driver only controls > > > > SCP core 0. This patch adds a basic driver to control the another core. > > > > > > > > Core 1 and core 0 of the SCP are housed in the same subsys.They see > > > > registers and memory in the same way. > > > > > > > > Core 1 of the SCP features its own set of core configuration registers, > > > > interrupt controller, timers, and DMAs. The rest of the peripherals > > > > in this subsystem are shared by core 0 and core 1. > > > > > > > > As for memory, core 1 has its own cache memory, and the SCP SRAM is shared > > > > by core 0 and core 1. > > > > > > > > > > Hello Tinghan, > > > > > > checking all the patches that are introducing support for the secondary SCP core, > > > it's clear that you're practically reusing *most of* mtk_scp in mtk_scp_dual. > > > > > > I don't think that adding a new configuration option for MTK_SCP_DUALCORE (nor a > > > new file just for that) is a good idea... the code is "short enough" so you should > > > really just add support for multi-core SCP in mtk_scp.c instead. > > > > > > After doing so, I have a hunch that we'll be able to reduce the size of this > > > implementation even more, as I see literally too much common code :-) > > > > > > > Hi Angelo, > > > > Thanks for your review. > > > > This series has 2 new files, mtk_scp_dual.c and mtk_scp_subdev.c. > > Is your advice to merge both files into mtk_scp.c, > > or to merely merge mtk_scp_dual.c to mtk_scp.c? > > > > Thanks, > > TingHan > > > > > > > > I suggest to merge both into mtk_scp.c and commonize/generalize functions inside > of there as much as possible... including the removal of #if IS_ENABLED(...) > macro usages, as you can simply check that during runtime by setting a bool > variable to true when it's dual-core. > > Let's do this first step. > I'll give you a more exhaustive review on v2, when this main step is done. > > Cheers, > Angelo Hi Angelo, Ok, I'll merge these files and send next version. Thanks, TingHan
© 2016 - 2026 Red Hat, Inc.