This patch updates the rproc_ops struct to include an optional
release_fw function.

The release_fw ops is responsible for releasing the remote processor
firmware image. The ops is called in the following cases:

 - An error occurs in rproc_start() between the loading of the segments and
      the start of the remote processor.
 - after stopping the remote processor.

Signed-off-by: Arnaud Pouliquen <arnaud.pouliquen@foss.st.com>
---
Updates from version V11:
- fix typo in @release_fw comment
---
 drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c | 5 +++++
 include/linux/remoteproc.h           | 3 +++
 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+)

diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
index 7694817f25d4..46863e1ca307 100644
--- a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
+++ b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
@@ -1258,6 +1258,9 @@ static int rproc_alloc_registered_carveouts(struct rproc *rproc)
 
 static void rproc_release_fw(struct rproc *rproc)
 {
+	if (rproc->ops->release_fw)
+		rproc->ops->release_fw(rproc);
+
 	/* Free the copy of the resource table */
 	kfree(rproc->cached_table);
 	rproc->cached_table = NULL;
@@ -1377,6 +1380,8 @@ static int rproc_start(struct rproc *rproc, const struct firmware *fw)
 unprepare_subdevices:
 	rproc_unprepare_subdevices(rproc);
 reset_table_ptr:
+	if (rproc->ops->release_fw)
+		rproc->ops->release_fw(rproc);
 	rproc->table_ptr = rproc->cached_table;
 
 	return ret;
diff --git a/include/linux/remoteproc.h b/include/linux/remoteproc.h
index 2e0ddcb2d792..08e0187a84d9 100644
--- a/include/linux/remoteproc.h
+++ b/include/linux/remoteproc.h
@@ -381,6 +381,8 @@ enum rsc_handling_status {
  * @panic:	optional callback to react to system panic, core will delay
  *		panic at least the returned number of milliseconds
  * @coredump:	  collect firmware dump after the subsystem is shutdown
+ * @release_fw:	optional function to release the firmware image from ROM memories.
+ *		This function is called after stopping the remote processor or in case of an error
  */
 struct rproc_ops {
 	int (*prepare)(struct rproc *rproc);
@@ -403,6 +405,7 @@ struct rproc_ops {
 	u64 (*get_boot_addr)(struct rproc *rproc, const struct firmware *fw);
 	unsigned long (*panic)(struct rproc *rproc);
 	void (*coredump)(struct rproc *rproc);
+	void (*release_fw)(struct rproc *rproc);
 };
 
 /**
-- 
2.25.1

On Mon, Nov 04, 2024 at 02:35:12PM +0100, Arnaud Pouliquen wrote:
> This patch updates the rproc_ops struct to include an optional
> release_fw function.
> 
> The release_fw ops is responsible for releasing the remote processor
> firmware image. The ops is called in the following cases:
> 
>  - An error occurs in rproc_start() between the loading of the segments and
>       the start of the remote processor.
>  - after stopping the remote processor.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Arnaud Pouliquen <arnaud.pouliquen@foss.st.com>
> ---
> Updates from version V11:
> - fix typo in @release_fw comment
> ---
>  drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c | 5 +++++
>  include/linux/remoteproc.h           | 3 +++
>  2 files changed, 8 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> index 7694817f25d4..46863e1ca307 100644
> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> @@ -1258,6 +1258,9 @@ static int rproc_alloc_registered_carveouts(struct rproc *rproc)
>  
>  static void rproc_release_fw(struct rproc *rproc)
>  {
> +	if (rproc->ops->release_fw)
> +		rproc->ops->release_fw(rproc);
> +
>  	/* Free the copy of the resource table */
>  	kfree(rproc->cached_table);
>  	rproc->cached_table = NULL;
> @@ -1377,6 +1380,8 @@ static int rproc_start(struct rproc *rproc, const struct firmware *fw)
>  unprepare_subdevices:
>  	rproc_unprepare_subdevices(rproc);
>  reset_table_ptr:
> +	if (rproc->ops->release_fw)
> +		rproc->ops->release_fw(rproc);
>  	rproc->table_ptr = rproc->cached_table;

I suggest the following:

1) Create two new functions, i.e rproc_load_fw() and rproc_release_fw().  The
only thing those would do is call rproc->ops->load_fw() and
rproc->ops->release_fw(), if they are present.  When a TEE interface is
available, ->load_fw() and ->release_fw() become rproc_tee_load_fw() and
rproc_tee_release_fw().

2) Call rproc_load_fw() in rproc_boot(), just before rproc_fw_boot().  If the
call to rproc_fw_boot() fails, call rproc_release_fw().

3) The same logic applies to rproc_boot_recovery(), i.e call rproc_load_fw()
before rproc_start() and call rproc_release_fw() if rproc_start() fails.

4) Take rproc_tee_load_fw() out of rproc_tee_parse_fw().  It will now be called
in rproc_load_fw().

5) As stated above function rproc_release_fw() now calls rproc_tee_release_fw().
The former is already called in rproc_shutdown() so we are good in that front.

With the above the cached_table management within the core remains the same and
we can get rid of patch 3.7.

Thanks,
Mathieu

>  
>  	return ret;
> diff --git a/include/linux/remoteproc.h b/include/linux/remoteproc.h
> index 2e0ddcb2d792..08e0187a84d9 100644
> --- a/include/linux/remoteproc.h
> +++ b/include/linux/remoteproc.h
> @@ -381,6 +381,8 @@ enum rsc_handling_status {
>   * @panic:	optional callback to react to system panic, core will delay
>   *		panic at least the returned number of milliseconds
>   * @coredump:	  collect firmware dump after the subsystem is shutdown
> + * @release_fw:	optional function to release the firmware image from ROM memories.
> + *		This function is called after stopping the remote processor or in case of an error
>   */
>  struct rproc_ops {
>  	int (*prepare)(struct rproc *rproc);
> @@ -403,6 +405,7 @@ struct rproc_ops {
>  	u64 (*get_boot_addr)(struct rproc *rproc, const struct firmware *fw);
>  	unsigned long (*panic)(struct rproc *rproc);
>  	void (*coredump)(struct rproc *rproc);
> +	void (*release_fw)(struct rproc *rproc);
>  };
>  
>  /**
> -- 
> 2.25.1
>

Hello Mathieu,

On 11/18/24 18:52, Mathieu Poirier wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 04, 2024 at 02:35:12PM +0100, Arnaud Pouliquen wrote:
>> This patch updates the rproc_ops struct to include an optional
>> release_fw function.
>>
>> The release_fw ops is responsible for releasing the remote processor
>> firmware image. The ops is called in the following cases:
>>
>>  - An error occurs in rproc_start() between the loading of the segments and
>>       the start of the remote processor.
>>  - after stopping the remote processor.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Arnaud Pouliquen <arnaud.pouliquen@foss.st.com>
>> ---
>> Updates from version V11:
>> - fix typo in @release_fw comment
>> ---
>>  drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c | 5 +++++
>>  include/linux/remoteproc.h           | 3 +++
>>  2 files changed, 8 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
>> index 7694817f25d4..46863e1ca307 100644
>> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
>> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
>> @@ -1258,6 +1258,9 @@ static int rproc_alloc_registered_carveouts(struct rproc *rproc)
>>  
>>  static void rproc_release_fw(struct rproc *rproc)
>>  {
>> +	if (rproc->ops->release_fw)
>> +		rproc->ops->release_fw(rproc);
>> +
>>  	/* Free the copy of the resource table */
>>  	kfree(rproc->cached_table);
>>  	rproc->cached_table = NULL;
>> @@ -1377,6 +1380,8 @@ static int rproc_start(struct rproc *rproc, const struct firmware *fw)
>>  unprepare_subdevices:
>>  	rproc_unprepare_subdevices(rproc);
>>  reset_table_ptr:
>> +	if (rproc->ops->release_fw)
>> +		rproc->ops->release_fw(rproc);
>>  	rproc->table_ptr = rproc->cached_table;
> 
> I suggest the following:
> 
> 1) Create two new functions, i.e rproc_load_fw() and rproc_release_fw().  The
> only thing those would do is call rproc->ops->load_fw() and
> rproc->ops->release_fw(), if they are present.  When a TEE interface is
> available, ->load_fw() and ->release_fw() become rproc_tee_load_fw() and
> rproc_tee_release_fw().


I'm wondering if it should be ->preload_fw() instead of ->load_fw() ops, as the
->load() op already exists.

> 
> 2) Call rproc_load_fw() in rproc_boot(), just before rproc_fw_boot().  If the
> call to rproc_fw_boot() fails, call rproc_release_fw().
> 
> 3) The same logic applies to rproc_boot_recovery(), i.e call rproc_load_fw()
> before rproc_start() and call rproc_release_fw() if rproc_start() fails.


I implemented this and I'm currently testing it.
Thise second part requires a few adjustments to work. The ->load() ops needs to
becomes optional to not be called if the "->preload_fw()" is used.

For that, I propose to return 0 in rproc_load_segments if rproc->ops->load is
NULL and compensate by checking that at least "->preload_fw()" or ->load() is
non-null in rproc_alloc_ops.

Thanks,
Arnaud


> 
> 4) Take rproc_tee_load_fw() out of rproc_tee_parse_fw().  It will now be called
> in rproc_load_fw().
> 
> 5) As stated above function rproc_release_fw() now calls rproc_tee_release_fw().
> The former is already called in rproc_shutdown() so we are good in that front.
> 
> With the above the cached_table management within the core remains the same and
> we can get rid of patch 3.7.

> 
> Thanks,
> Mathieu
> 
>>  
>>  	return ret;
>> diff --git a/include/linux/remoteproc.h b/include/linux/remoteproc.h
>> index 2e0ddcb2d792..08e0187a84d9 100644
>> --- a/include/linux/remoteproc.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/remoteproc.h
>> @@ -381,6 +381,8 @@ enum rsc_handling_status {
>>   * @panic:	optional callback to react to system panic, core will delay
>>   *		panic at least the returned number of milliseconds
>>   * @coredump:	  collect firmware dump after the subsystem is shutdown
>> + * @release_fw:	optional function to release the firmware image from ROM memories.
>> + *		This function is called after stopping the remote processor or in case of an error
>>   */
>>  struct rproc_ops {
>>  	int (*prepare)(struct rproc *rproc);
>> @@ -403,6 +405,7 @@ struct rproc_ops {
>>  	u64 (*get_boot_addr)(struct rproc *rproc, const struct firmware *fw);
>>  	unsigned long (*panic)(struct rproc *rproc);
>>  	void (*coredump)(struct rproc *rproc);
>> +	void (*release_fw)(struct rproc *rproc);
>>  };
>>  
>>  /**
>> -- 
>> 2.25.1
>>

On Tue, 19 Nov 2024 at 11:14, Arnaud POULIQUEN
<arnaud.pouliquen@foss.st.com> wrote:
>
> Hello Mathieu,
>
> On 11/18/24 18:52, Mathieu Poirier wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 04, 2024 at 02:35:12PM +0100, Arnaud Pouliquen wrote:
> >> This patch updates the rproc_ops struct to include an optional
> >> release_fw function.
> >>
> >> The release_fw ops is responsible for releasing the remote processor
> >> firmware image. The ops is called in the following cases:
> >>
> >>  - An error occurs in rproc_start() between the loading of the segments and
> >>       the start of the remote processor.
> >>  - after stopping the remote processor.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Arnaud Pouliquen <arnaud.pouliquen@foss.st.com>
> >> ---
> >> Updates from version V11:
> >> - fix typo in @release_fw comment
> >> ---
> >>  drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c | 5 +++++
> >>  include/linux/remoteproc.h           | 3 +++
> >>  2 files changed, 8 insertions(+)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> >> index 7694817f25d4..46863e1ca307 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> >> @@ -1258,6 +1258,9 @@ static int rproc_alloc_registered_carveouts(struct rproc *rproc)
> >>
> >>  static void rproc_release_fw(struct rproc *rproc)
> >>  {
> >> +    if (rproc->ops->release_fw)
> >> +            rproc->ops->release_fw(rproc);
> >> +
> >>      /* Free the copy of the resource table */
> >>      kfree(rproc->cached_table);
> >>      rproc->cached_table = NULL;
> >> @@ -1377,6 +1380,8 @@ static int rproc_start(struct rproc *rproc, const struct firmware *fw)
> >>  unprepare_subdevices:
> >>      rproc_unprepare_subdevices(rproc);
> >>  reset_table_ptr:
> >> +    if (rproc->ops->release_fw)
> >> +            rproc->ops->release_fw(rproc);
> >>      rproc->table_ptr = rproc->cached_table;
> >
> > I suggest the following:
> >
> > 1) Create two new functions, i.e rproc_load_fw() and rproc_release_fw().  The
> > only thing those would do is call rproc->ops->load_fw() and
> > rproc->ops->release_fw(), if they are present.  When a TEE interface is
> > available, ->load_fw() and ->release_fw() become rproc_tee_load_fw() and
> > rproc_tee_release_fw().
>
>
> I'm wondering if it should be ->preload_fw() instead of ->load_fw() ops, as the
> ->load() op already exists.
>

I agree that ->load() and ->load_fw() will lead to confusion.  I would
support ->preload_fw() but there is no obvious antonyme.

Since we already have rproc_ops::prepare() and rproc_prepare_device()
I suggest rproc_ops::prepare_fw() and rproc_prepare_fw().  The
corollary would be rproc_ops::unprepare_fw() and rproc_unprepare_fm().
That said, I'm open to other ideas should you be interested in finding
other alternatives.

> >
> > 2) Call rproc_load_fw() in rproc_boot(), just before rproc_fw_boot().  If the
> > call to rproc_fw_boot() fails, call rproc_release_fw().
> >
> > 3) The same logic applies to rproc_boot_recovery(), i.e call rproc_load_fw()
> > before rproc_start() and call rproc_release_fw() if rproc_start() fails.
>
>
> I implemented this and I'm currently testing it.
> Thise second part requires a few adjustments to work. The ->load() ops needs to
> becomes optional to not be called if the "->preload_fw()" is used.
>
> For that, I propose to return 0 in rproc_load_segments if rproc->ops->load is
> NULL and compensate by checking that at least "->preload_fw()" or ->load() is
> non-null in rproc_alloc_ops.
>

I agree.

> Thanks,
> Arnaud
>
>
> >
> > 4) Take rproc_tee_load_fw() out of rproc_tee_parse_fw().  It will now be called
> > in rproc_load_fw().
> >
> > 5) As stated above function rproc_release_fw() now calls rproc_tee_release_fw().
> > The former is already called in rproc_shutdown() so we are good in that front.
> >
> > With the above the cached_table management within the core remains the same and
> > we can get rid of patch 3.7.
>
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Mathieu
> >
> >>
> >>      return ret;
> >> diff --git a/include/linux/remoteproc.h b/include/linux/remoteproc.h
> >> index 2e0ddcb2d792..08e0187a84d9 100644
> >> --- a/include/linux/remoteproc.h
> >> +++ b/include/linux/remoteproc.h
> >> @@ -381,6 +381,8 @@ enum rsc_handling_status {
> >>   * @panic:  optional callback to react to system panic, core will delay
> >>   *          panic at least the returned number of milliseconds
> >>   * @coredump:         collect firmware dump after the subsystem is shutdown
> >> + * @release_fw:     optional function to release the firmware image from ROM memories.
> >> + *          This function is called after stopping the remote processor or in case of an error
> >>   */
> >>  struct rproc_ops {
> >>      int (*prepare)(struct rproc *rproc);
> >> @@ -403,6 +405,7 @@ struct rproc_ops {
> >>      u64 (*get_boot_addr)(struct rproc *rproc, const struct firmware *fw);
> >>      unsigned long (*panic)(struct rproc *rproc);
> >>      void (*coredump)(struct rproc *rproc);
> >> +    void (*release_fw)(struct rproc *rproc);
> >>  };
> >>
> >>  /**
> >> --
> >> 2.25.1
> >>

On 11/19/24 21:38, Mathieu Poirier wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Nov 2024 at 11:14, Arnaud POULIQUEN
> <arnaud.pouliquen@foss.st.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hello Mathieu,
>>
>> On 11/18/24 18:52, Mathieu Poirier wrote:
>>> On Mon, Nov 04, 2024 at 02:35:12PM +0100, Arnaud Pouliquen wrote:
>>>> This patch updates the rproc_ops struct to include an optional
>>>> release_fw function.
>>>>
>>>> The release_fw ops is responsible for releasing the remote processor
>>>> firmware image. The ops is called in the following cases:
>>>>
>>>>  - An error occurs in rproc_start() between the loading of the segments and
>>>>       the start of the remote processor.
>>>>  - after stopping the remote processor.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Arnaud Pouliquen <arnaud.pouliquen@foss.st.com>
>>>> ---
>>>> Updates from version V11:
>>>> - fix typo in @release_fw comment
>>>> ---
>>>>  drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c | 5 +++++
>>>>  include/linux/remoteproc.h           | 3 +++
>>>>  2 files changed, 8 insertions(+)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
>>>> index 7694817f25d4..46863e1ca307 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
>>>> @@ -1258,6 +1258,9 @@ static int rproc_alloc_registered_carveouts(struct rproc *rproc)
>>>>
>>>>  static void rproc_release_fw(struct rproc *rproc)
>>>>  {
>>>> +    if (rproc->ops->release_fw)
>>>> +            rproc->ops->release_fw(rproc);
>>>> +
>>>>      /* Free the copy of the resource table */
>>>>      kfree(rproc->cached_table);
>>>>      rproc->cached_table = NULL;
>>>> @@ -1377,6 +1380,8 @@ static int rproc_start(struct rproc *rproc, const struct firmware *fw)
>>>>  unprepare_subdevices:
>>>>      rproc_unprepare_subdevices(rproc);
>>>>  reset_table_ptr:
>>>> +    if (rproc->ops->release_fw)
>>>> +            rproc->ops->release_fw(rproc);
>>>>      rproc->table_ptr = rproc->cached_table;
>>>
>>> I suggest the following:
>>>
>>> 1) Create two new functions, i.e rproc_load_fw() and rproc_release_fw().  The
>>> only thing those would do is call rproc->ops->load_fw() and
>>> rproc->ops->release_fw(), if they are present.  When a TEE interface is
>>> available, ->load_fw() and ->release_fw() become rproc_tee_load_fw() and
>>> rproc_tee_release_fw().
>>
>>
>> I'm wondering if it should be ->preload_fw() instead of ->load_fw() ops, as the
>> ->load() op already exists.
>>
> 
> I agree that ->load() and ->load_fw() will lead to confusion.  I would
> support ->preload_fw() but there is no obvious antonyme.
> 
> Since we already have rproc_ops::prepare() and rproc_prepare_device()
> I suggest rproc_ops::prepare_fw() and rproc_prepare_fw().  The
> corollary would be rproc_ops::unprepare_fw() and rproc_unprepare_fm().
> That said, I'm open to other ideas should you be interested in finding
> other alternatives.
> 


1) Using ops::prepare_fw/unprepare_fw:
My concern is that it could also lead to confusion as we would load the firmware
on ops::prepare_fw and do nothing on ops::load(). That would not match with the
ops action. look to me that in this option, ops::load() must be kept as
mandatory ops for consistence.


2) Using ops::preload_fw:
This seems to better reflect the use case. Concerning the antonym choice , could
we consider that ops::release_fw() is the antonym of both ops;;preload_fw and
ops::load?
some other antonym proposal:
 - unload_fw
 - postunload_fw


3) Other alternatives:

3-a) using ops::rproc_prepare/unprepare_device.
Same concern that prepare_fw/unprepare_fw
another drawbackis that rproc_tee_load_fw() would be not directly mapped to an
rproc ops but platform
driver should need to call rproc_tee_load_fw() into its ops::prepare() function
(a.e stm32_rproc_prepare).


3-b) Another alternative I can see is the one I proposed in version 3 [1]. The
principle was to keep existing ops but propose an alternative boot sequence.
Perhaps a backup solution is to reanalyze this option if no other is suitable.

[1]
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/8af59b01-53cf-4fc4-9946-6c630fb7b38e@quicinc.com/T/

Please just tell/confirm me your prefered solution that I propose it in next
revision.

Regards,
Arnaud

>>>
>>> 2) Call rproc_load_fw() in rproc_boot(), just before rproc_fw_boot().  If the
>>> call to rproc_fw_boot() fails, call rproc_release_fw().
>>>
>>> 3) The same logic applies to rproc_boot_recovery(), i.e call rproc_load_fw()
>>> before rproc_start() and call rproc_release_fw() if rproc_start() fails.
>>
>>
>> I implemented this and I'm currently testing it.
>> Thise second part requires a few adjustments to work. The ->load() ops needs to
>> becomes optional to not be called if the "->preload_fw()" is used.
>>
>> For that, I propose to return 0 in rproc_load_segments if rproc->ops->load is
>> NULL and compensate by checking that at least "->preload_fw()" or ->load() is
>> non-null in rproc_alloc_ops.
>>
> 
> I agree.
> 
>> Thanks,
>> Arnaud
>>
>>
>>>
>>> 4) Take rproc_tee_load_fw() out of rproc_tee_parse_fw().  It will now be called
>>> in rproc_load_fw().
>>>
>>> 5) As stated above function rproc_release_fw() now calls rproc_tee_release_fw().
>>> The former is already called in rproc_shutdown() so we are good in that front.
>>>
>>> With the above the cached_table management within the core remains the same and
>>> we can get rid of patch 3.7.
>>
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Mathieu
>>>
>>>>
>>>>      return ret;
>>>> diff --git a/include/linux/remoteproc.h b/include/linux/remoteproc.h
>>>> index 2e0ddcb2d792..08e0187a84d9 100644
>>>> --- a/include/linux/remoteproc.h
>>>> +++ b/include/linux/remoteproc.h
>>>> @@ -381,6 +381,8 @@ enum rsc_handling_status {
>>>>   * @panic:  optional callback to react to system panic, core will delay
>>>>   *          panic at least the returned number of milliseconds
>>>>   * @coredump:         collect firmware dump after the subsystem is shutdown
>>>> + * @release_fw:     optional function to release the firmware image from ROM memories.
>>>> + *          This function is called after stopping the remote processor or in case of an error
>>>>   */
>>>>  struct rproc_ops {
>>>>      int (*prepare)(struct rproc *rproc);
>>>> @@ -403,6 +405,7 @@ struct rproc_ops {
>>>>      u64 (*get_boot_addr)(struct rproc *rproc, const struct firmware *fw);
>>>>      unsigned long (*panic)(struct rproc *rproc);
>>>>      void (*coredump)(struct rproc *rproc);
>>>> +    void (*release_fw)(struct rproc *rproc);
>>>>  };
>>>>
>>>>  /**
>>>> --
>>>> 2.25.1
>>>>

On Tue, 19 Nov 2024 at 13:38, Mathieu Poirier
<mathieu.poirier@linaro.org> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 19 Nov 2024 at 11:14, Arnaud POULIQUEN
> <arnaud.pouliquen@foss.st.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hello Mathieu,
> >
> > On 11/18/24 18:52, Mathieu Poirier wrote:
> > > On Mon, Nov 04, 2024 at 02:35:12PM +0100, Arnaud Pouliquen wrote:
> > >> This patch updates the rproc_ops struct to include an optional
> > >> release_fw function.
> > >>
> > >> The release_fw ops is responsible for releasing the remote processor
> > >> firmware image. The ops is called in the following cases:
> > >>
> > >>  - An error occurs in rproc_start() between the loading of the segments and
> > >>       the start of the remote processor.
> > >>  - after stopping the remote processor.
> > >>
> > >> Signed-off-by: Arnaud Pouliquen <arnaud.pouliquen@foss.st.com>
> > >> ---
> > >> Updates from version V11:
> > >> - fix typo in @release_fw comment
> > >> ---
> > >>  drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c | 5 +++++
> > >>  include/linux/remoteproc.h           | 3 +++
> > >>  2 files changed, 8 insertions(+)
> > >>
> > >> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> > >> index 7694817f25d4..46863e1ca307 100644
> > >> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> > >> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> > >> @@ -1258,6 +1258,9 @@ static int rproc_alloc_registered_carveouts(struct rproc *rproc)
> > >>
> > >>  static void rproc_release_fw(struct rproc *rproc)
> > >>  {
> > >> +    if (rproc->ops->release_fw)
> > >> +            rproc->ops->release_fw(rproc);
> > >> +
> > >>      /* Free the copy of the resource table */
> > >>      kfree(rproc->cached_table);
> > >>      rproc->cached_table = NULL;
> > >> @@ -1377,6 +1380,8 @@ static int rproc_start(struct rproc *rproc, const struct firmware *fw)
> > >>  unprepare_subdevices:
> > >>      rproc_unprepare_subdevices(rproc);
> > >>  reset_table_ptr:
> > >> +    if (rproc->ops->release_fw)
> > >> +            rproc->ops->release_fw(rproc);
> > >>      rproc->table_ptr = rproc->cached_table;
> > >
> > > I suggest the following:
> > >
> > > 1) Create two new functions, i.e rproc_load_fw() and rproc_release_fw().  The
> > > only thing those would do is call rproc->ops->load_fw() and
> > > rproc->ops->release_fw(), if they are present.  When a TEE interface is
> > > available, ->load_fw() and ->release_fw() become rproc_tee_load_fw() and
> > > rproc_tee_release_fw().
> >
> >
> > I'm wondering if it should be ->preload_fw() instead of ->load_fw() ops, as the
> > ->load() op already exists.
> >
>
> I agree that ->load() and ->load_fw() will lead to confusion.  I would
> support ->preload_fw() but there is no obvious antonyme.
>
> Since we already have rproc_ops::prepare() and rproc_prepare_device()
> I suggest rproc_ops::prepare_fw() and rproc_prepare_fw().  The
> corollary would be rproc_ops::unprepare_fw() and rproc_unprepare_fm().
> That said, I'm open to other ideas should you be interested in finding
> other alternatives.
>

Actually...  A better approach might to rename rproc::load to
rproc::load_segments.  That way we can use rproc::load_fw() and
rproc_load_fw() without confusion.

> > >
> > > 2) Call rproc_load_fw() in rproc_boot(), just before rproc_fw_boot().  If the
> > > call to rproc_fw_boot() fails, call rproc_release_fw().
> > >
> > > 3) The same logic applies to rproc_boot_recovery(), i.e call rproc_load_fw()
> > > before rproc_start() and call rproc_release_fw() if rproc_start() fails.
> >
> >
> > I implemented this and I'm currently testing it.
> > Thise second part requires a few adjustments to work. The ->load() ops needs to
> > becomes optional to not be called if the "->preload_fw()" is used.
> >
> > For that, I propose to return 0 in rproc_load_segments if rproc->ops->load is
> > NULL and compensate by checking that at least "->preload_fw()" or ->load() is
> > non-null in rproc_alloc_ops.
> >
>
> I agree.
>
> > Thanks,
> > Arnaud
> >
> >
> > >
> > > 4) Take rproc_tee_load_fw() out of rproc_tee_parse_fw().  It will now be called
> > > in rproc_load_fw().
> > >
> > > 5) As stated above function rproc_release_fw() now calls rproc_tee_release_fw().
> > > The former is already called in rproc_shutdown() so we are good in that front.
> > >
> > > With the above the cached_table management within the core remains the same and
> > > we can get rid of patch 3.7.
> >
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Mathieu
> > >
> > >>
> > >>      return ret;
> > >> diff --git a/include/linux/remoteproc.h b/include/linux/remoteproc.h
> > >> index 2e0ddcb2d792..08e0187a84d9 100644
> > >> --- a/include/linux/remoteproc.h
> > >> +++ b/include/linux/remoteproc.h
> > >> @@ -381,6 +381,8 @@ enum rsc_handling_status {
> > >>   * @panic:  optional callback to react to system panic, core will delay
> > >>   *          panic at least the returned number of milliseconds
> > >>   * @coredump:         collect firmware dump after the subsystem is shutdown
> > >> + * @release_fw:     optional function to release the firmware image from ROM memories.
> > >> + *          This function is called after stopping the remote processor or in case of an error
> > >>   */
> > >>  struct rproc_ops {
> > >>      int (*prepare)(struct rproc *rproc);
> > >> @@ -403,6 +405,7 @@ struct rproc_ops {
> > >>      u64 (*get_boot_addr)(struct rproc *rproc, const struct firmware *fw);
> > >>      unsigned long (*panic)(struct rproc *rproc);
> > >>      void (*coredump)(struct rproc *rproc);
> > >> +    void (*release_fw)(struct rproc *rproc);
> > >>  };
> > >>
> > >>  /**
> > >> --
> > >> 2.25.1
> > >>

On 11/20/24 17:04, Mathieu Poirier wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Nov 2024 at 13:38, Mathieu Poirier
> <mathieu.poirier@linaro.org> wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, 19 Nov 2024 at 11:14, Arnaud POULIQUEN
>> <arnaud.pouliquen@foss.st.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hello Mathieu,
>>>
>>> On 11/18/24 18:52, Mathieu Poirier wrote:
>>>> On Mon, Nov 04, 2024 at 02:35:12PM +0100, Arnaud Pouliquen wrote:
>>>>> This patch updates the rproc_ops struct to include an optional
>>>>> release_fw function.
>>>>>
>>>>> The release_fw ops is responsible for releasing the remote processor
>>>>> firmware image. The ops is called in the following cases:
>>>>>
>>>>>  - An error occurs in rproc_start() between the loading of the segments and
>>>>>       the start of the remote processor.
>>>>>  - after stopping the remote processor.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Arnaud Pouliquen <arnaud.pouliquen@foss.st.com>
>>>>> ---
>>>>> Updates from version V11:
>>>>> - fix typo in @release_fw comment
>>>>> ---
>>>>>  drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c | 5 +++++
>>>>>  include/linux/remoteproc.h           | 3 +++
>>>>>  2 files changed, 8 insertions(+)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
>>>>> index 7694817f25d4..46863e1ca307 100644
>>>>> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
>>>>> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
>>>>> @@ -1258,6 +1258,9 @@ static int rproc_alloc_registered_carveouts(struct rproc *rproc)
>>>>>
>>>>>  static void rproc_release_fw(struct rproc *rproc)
>>>>>  {
>>>>> +    if (rproc->ops->release_fw)
>>>>> +            rproc->ops->release_fw(rproc);
>>>>> +
>>>>>      /* Free the copy of the resource table */
>>>>>      kfree(rproc->cached_table);
>>>>>      rproc->cached_table = NULL;
>>>>> @@ -1377,6 +1380,8 @@ static int rproc_start(struct rproc *rproc, const struct firmware *fw)
>>>>>  unprepare_subdevices:
>>>>>      rproc_unprepare_subdevices(rproc);
>>>>>  reset_table_ptr:
>>>>> +    if (rproc->ops->release_fw)
>>>>> +            rproc->ops->release_fw(rproc);
>>>>>      rproc->table_ptr = rproc->cached_table;
>>>>
>>>> I suggest the following:
>>>>
>>>> 1) Create two new functions, i.e rproc_load_fw() and rproc_release_fw().  The
>>>> only thing those would do is call rproc->ops->load_fw() and
>>>> rproc->ops->release_fw(), if they are present.  When a TEE interface is
>>>> available, ->load_fw() and ->release_fw() become rproc_tee_load_fw() and
>>>> rproc_tee_release_fw().
>>>
>>>
>>> I'm wondering if it should be ->preload_fw() instead of ->load_fw() ops, as the
>>> ->load() op already exists.
>>>
>>
>> I agree that ->load() and ->load_fw() will lead to confusion.  I would
>> support ->preload_fw() but there is no obvious antonyme.
>>
>> Since we already have rproc_ops::prepare() and rproc_prepare_device()
>> I suggest rproc_ops::prepare_fw() and rproc_prepare_fw().  The
>> corollary would be rproc_ops::unprepare_fw() and rproc_unprepare_fm().
>> That said, I'm open to other ideas should you be interested in finding
>> other alternatives.
>>
> 
> Actually...  A better approach might to rename rproc::load to
> rproc::load_segments.  That way we can use rproc::load_fw() and
> rproc_load_fw() without confusion.

Concerning this proposal, please correct me if I'm wrong
- ops::load_segments() would be used for ELF format only as segment notion seems
linked to this format.
- ops:rproc_load_fw should be used for other formats.

The risk is that someone may later come with a requirement to get a resource
table first to configure some memories before loading a non-ELF firmware.


> 
>>>>
>>>> 2) Call rproc_load_fw() in rproc_boot(), just before rproc_fw_boot().  If the
>>>> call to rproc_fw_boot() fails, call rproc_release_fw().
>>>>
>>>> 3) The same logic applies to rproc_boot_recovery(), i.e call rproc_load_fw()
>>>> before rproc_start() and call rproc_release_fw() if rproc_start() fails.
>>>
>>>
>>> I implemented this and I'm currently testing it.
>>> Thise second part requires a few adjustments to work. The ->load() ops needs to
>>> becomes optional to not be called if the "->preload_fw()" is used.
>>>
>>> For that, I propose to return 0 in rproc_load_segments if rproc->ops->load is
>>> NULL and compensate by checking that at least "->preload_fw()" or ->load() is
>>> non-null in rproc_alloc_ops.
>>>
>>
>> I agree.
>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Arnaud
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> 4) Take rproc_tee_load_fw() out of rproc_tee_parse_fw().  It will now be called
>>>> in rproc_load_fw().
>>>>
>>>> 5) As stated above function rproc_release_fw() now calls rproc_tee_release_fw().
>>>> The former is already called in rproc_shutdown() so we are good in that front.
>>>>
>>>> With the above the cached_table management within the core remains the same and
>>>> we can get rid of patch 3.7.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Mathieu
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>      return ret;
>>>>> diff --git a/include/linux/remoteproc.h b/include/linux/remoteproc.h
>>>>> index 2e0ddcb2d792..08e0187a84d9 100644
>>>>> --- a/include/linux/remoteproc.h
>>>>> +++ b/include/linux/remoteproc.h
>>>>> @@ -381,6 +381,8 @@ enum rsc_handling_status {
>>>>>   * @panic:  optional callback to react to system panic, core will delay
>>>>>   *          panic at least the returned number of milliseconds
>>>>>   * @coredump:         collect firmware dump after the subsystem is shutdown
>>>>> + * @release_fw:     optional function to release the firmware image from ROM memories.
>>>>> + *          This function is called after stopping the remote processor or in case of an error
>>>>>   */
>>>>>  struct rproc_ops {
>>>>>      int (*prepare)(struct rproc *rproc);
>>>>> @@ -403,6 +405,7 @@ struct rproc_ops {
>>>>>      u64 (*get_boot_addr)(struct rproc *rproc, const struct firmware *fw);
>>>>>      unsigned long (*panic)(struct rproc *rproc);
>>>>>      void (*coredump)(struct rproc *rproc);
>>>>> +    void (*release_fw)(struct rproc *rproc);
>>>>>  };
>>>>>
>>>>>  /**
>>>>> --
>>>>> 2.25.1
>>>>>

On Wed, 20 Nov 2024 at 09:39, Arnaud POULIQUEN
<arnaud.pouliquen@foss.st.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 11/20/24 17:04, Mathieu Poirier wrote:
> > On Tue, 19 Nov 2024 at 13:38, Mathieu Poirier
> > <mathieu.poirier@linaro.org> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Tue, 19 Nov 2024 at 11:14, Arnaud POULIQUEN
> >> <arnaud.pouliquen@foss.st.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Hello Mathieu,
> >>>
> >>> On 11/18/24 18:52, Mathieu Poirier wrote:
> >>>> On Mon, Nov 04, 2024 at 02:35:12PM +0100, Arnaud Pouliquen wrote:
> >>>>> This patch updates the rproc_ops struct to include an optional
> >>>>> release_fw function.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The release_fw ops is responsible for releasing the remote processor
> >>>>> firmware image. The ops is called in the following cases:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>  - An error occurs in rproc_start() between the loading of the segments and
> >>>>>       the start of the remote processor.
> >>>>>  - after stopping the remote processor.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Arnaud Pouliquen <arnaud.pouliquen@foss.st.com>
> >>>>> ---
> >>>>> Updates from version V11:
> >>>>> - fix typo in @release_fw comment
> >>>>> ---
> >>>>>  drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c | 5 +++++
> >>>>>  include/linux/remoteproc.h           | 3 +++
> >>>>>  2 files changed, 8 insertions(+)
> >>>>>
> >>>>> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> >>>>> index 7694817f25d4..46863e1ca307 100644
> >>>>> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> >>>>> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> >>>>> @@ -1258,6 +1258,9 @@ static int rproc_alloc_registered_carveouts(struct rproc *rproc)
> >>>>>
> >>>>>  static void rproc_release_fw(struct rproc *rproc)
> >>>>>  {
> >>>>> +    if (rproc->ops->release_fw)
> >>>>> +            rproc->ops->release_fw(rproc);
> >>>>> +
> >>>>>      /* Free the copy of the resource table */
> >>>>>      kfree(rproc->cached_table);
> >>>>>      rproc->cached_table = NULL;
> >>>>> @@ -1377,6 +1380,8 @@ static int rproc_start(struct rproc *rproc, const struct firmware *fw)
> >>>>>  unprepare_subdevices:
> >>>>>      rproc_unprepare_subdevices(rproc);
> >>>>>  reset_table_ptr:
> >>>>> +    if (rproc->ops->release_fw)
> >>>>> +            rproc->ops->release_fw(rproc);
> >>>>>      rproc->table_ptr = rproc->cached_table;
> >>>>
> >>>> I suggest the following:
> >>>>
> >>>> 1) Create two new functions, i.e rproc_load_fw() and rproc_release_fw().  The
> >>>> only thing those would do is call rproc->ops->load_fw() and
> >>>> rproc->ops->release_fw(), if they are present.  When a TEE interface is
> >>>> available, ->load_fw() and ->release_fw() become rproc_tee_load_fw() and
> >>>> rproc_tee_release_fw().
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> I'm wondering if it should be ->preload_fw() instead of ->load_fw() ops, as the
> >>> ->load() op already exists.
> >>>
> >>
> >> I agree that ->load() and ->load_fw() will lead to confusion.  I would
> >> support ->preload_fw() but there is no obvious antonyme.
> >>
> >> Since we already have rproc_ops::prepare() and rproc_prepare_device()
> >> I suggest rproc_ops::prepare_fw() and rproc_prepare_fw().  The
> >> corollary would be rproc_ops::unprepare_fw() and rproc_unprepare_fm().
> >> That said, I'm open to other ideas should you be interested in finding
> >> other alternatives.
> >>
> >
> > Actually...  A better approach might to rename rproc::load to
> > rproc::load_segments.  That way we can use rproc::load_fw() and
> > rproc_load_fw() without confusion.
>
> Concerning this proposal, please correct me if I'm wrong
> - ops::load_segments() would be used for ELF format only as segment notion seems
> linked to this format.

Correct - nothing different from what it is now.

> - ops:rproc_load_fw should be used for other formats.
>
> The risk is that someone may later come with a requirement to get a resource
> table first to configure some memories before loading a non-ELF firmware.
>

We can address that problem if/when it comes about.

>
> >
> >>>>
> >>>> 2) Call rproc_load_fw() in rproc_boot(), just before rproc_fw_boot().  If the
> >>>> call to rproc_fw_boot() fails, call rproc_release_fw().
> >>>>
> >>>> 3) The same logic applies to rproc_boot_recovery(), i.e call rproc_load_fw()
> >>>> before rproc_start() and call rproc_release_fw() if rproc_start() fails.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> I implemented this and I'm currently testing it.
> >>> Thise second part requires a few adjustments to work. The ->load() ops needs to
> >>> becomes optional to not be called if the "->preload_fw()" is used.
> >>>
> >>> For that, I propose to return 0 in rproc_load_segments if rproc->ops->load is
> >>> NULL and compensate by checking that at least "->preload_fw()" or ->load() is
> >>> non-null in rproc_alloc_ops.
> >>>
> >>
> >> I agree.
> >>
> >>> Thanks,
> >>> Arnaud
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>> 4) Take rproc_tee_load_fw() out of rproc_tee_parse_fw().  It will now be called
> >>>> in rproc_load_fw().
> >>>>
> >>>> 5) As stated above function rproc_release_fw() now calls rproc_tee_release_fw().
> >>>> The former is already called in rproc_shutdown() so we are good in that front.
> >>>>
> >>>> With the above the cached_table management within the core remains the same and
> >>>> we can get rid of patch 3.7.
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks,
> >>>> Mathieu
> >>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>      return ret;
> >>>>> diff --git a/include/linux/remoteproc.h b/include/linux/remoteproc.h
> >>>>> index 2e0ddcb2d792..08e0187a84d9 100644
> >>>>> --- a/include/linux/remoteproc.h
> >>>>> +++ b/include/linux/remoteproc.h
> >>>>> @@ -381,6 +381,8 @@ enum rsc_handling_status {
> >>>>>   * @panic:  optional callback to react to system panic, core will delay
> >>>>>   *          panic at least the returned number of milliseconds
> >>>>>   * @coredump:         collect firmware dump after the subsystem is shutdown
> >>>>> + * @release_fw:     optional function to release the firmware image from ROM memories.
> >>>>> + *          This function is called after stopping the remote processor or in case of an error
> >>>>>   */
> >>>>>  struct rproc_ops {
> >>>>>      int (*prepare)(struct rproc *rproc);
> >>>>> @@ -403,6 +405,7 @@ struct rproc_ops {
> >>>>>      u64 (*get_boot_addr)(struct rproc *rproc, const struct firmware *fw);
> >>>>>      unsigned long (*panic)(struct rproc *rproc);
> >>>>>      void (*coredump)(struct rproc *rproc);
> >>>>> +    void (*release_fw)(struct rproc *rproc);
> >>>>>  };
> >>>>>
> >>>>>  /**
> >>>>> --
> >>>>> 2.25.1
> >>>>>

hello Mathieu,

On 11/18/24 18:52, Mathieu Poirier wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 04, 2024 at 02:35:12PM +0100, Arnaud Pouliquen wrote:
>> This patch updates the rproc_ops struct to include an optional
>> release_fw function.
>>
>> The release_fw ops is responsible for releasing the remote processor
>> firmware image. The ops is called in the following cases:
>>
>>  - An error occurs in rproc_start() between the loading of the segments and
>>       the start of the remote processor.
>>  - after stopping the remote processor.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Arnaud Pouliquen <arnaud.pouliquen@foss.st.com>
>> ---
>> Updates from version V11:
>> - fix typo in @release_fw comment
>> ---
>>  drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c | 5 +++++
>>  include/linux/remoteproc.h           | 3 +++
>>  2 files changed, 8 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
>> index 7694817f25d4..46863e1ca307 100644
>> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
>> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
>> @@ -1258,6 +1258,9 @@ static int rproc_alloc_registered_carveouts(struct rproc *rproc)
>>  
>>  static void rproc_release_fw(struct rproc *rproc)
>>  {
>> +	if (rproc->ops->release_fw)
>> +		rproc->ops->release_fw(rproc);
>> +
>>  	/* Free the copy of the resource table */
>>  	kfree(rproc->cached_table);
>>  	rproc->cached_table = NULL;
>> @@ -1377,6 +1380,8 @@ static int rproc_start(struct rproc *rproc, const struct firmware *fw)
>>  unprepare_subdevices:
>>  	rproc_unprepare_subdevices(rproc);
>>  reset_table_ptr:
>> +	if (rproc->ops->release_fw)
>> +		rproc->ops->release_fw(rproc);
>>  	rproc->table_ptr = rproc->cached_table;
> 
> I suggest the following:
> 
> 1) Create two new functions, i.e rproc_load_fw() and rproc_release_fw().  The
> only thing those would do is call rproc->ops->load_fw() and
> rproc->ops->release_fw(), if they are present.  When a TEE interface is
> available, ->load_fw() and ->release_fw() become rproc_tee_load_fw() and
> rproc_tee_release_fw().
> 
> 2) Call rproc_load_fw() in rproc_boot(), just before rproc_fw_boot().  If the
> call to rproc_fw_boot() fails, call rproc_release_fw().
> 
> 3) The same logic applies to rproc_boot_recovery(), i.e call rproc_load_fw()
> before rproc_start() and call rproc_release_fw() if rproc_start() fails.
> 
> 4) Take rproc_tee_load_fw() out of rproc_tee_parse_fw().  It will now be called
> in rproc_load_fw().
> 
> 5) As stated above function rproc_release_fw() now calls rproc_tee_release_fw().
> The former is already called in rproc_shutdown() so we are good in that front.
> 
> With the above the cached_table management within the core remains the same and
> we can get rid of patch 3.7.

Thanks for your suggestion! I will try this in next revision.

Regards,
Arnaud

> 
> Thanks,
> Mathieu
> 
>>  
>>  	return ret;
>> diff --git a/include/linux/remoteproc.h b/include/linux/remoteproc.h
>> index 2e0ddcb2d792..08e0187a84d9 100644
>> --- a/include/linux/remoteproc.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/remoteproc.h
>> @@ -381,6 +381,8 @@ enum rsc_handling_status {
>>   * @panic:	optional callback to react to system panic, core will delay
>>   *		panic at least the returned number of milliseconds
>>   * @coredump:	  collect firmware dump after the subsystem is shutdown
>> + * @release_fw:	optional function to release the firmware image from ROM memories.
>> + *		This function is called after stopping the remote processor or in case of an error
>>   */
>>  struct rproc_ops {
>>  	int (*prepare)(struct rproc *rproc);
>> @@ -403,6 +405,7 @@ struct rproc_ops {
>>  	u64 (*get_boot_addr)(struct rproc *rproc, const struct firmware *fw);
>>  	unsigned long (*panic)(struct rproc *rproc);
>>  	void (*coredump)(struct rproc *rproc);
>> +	void (*release_fw)(struct rproc *rproc);
>>  };
>>  
>>  /**
>> -- 
>> 2.25.1
>>

On Mon, Nov 04, 2024 at 02:35:12PM +0100, Arnaud Pouliquen wrote:
> This patch updates the rproc_ops struct to include an optional
> release_fw function.
> 
> The release_fw ops is responsible for releasing the remote processor
> firmware image. The ops is called in the following cases:
> 
>  - An error occurs in rproc_start() between the loading of the segments and
>       the start of the remote processor.
>  - after stopping the remote processor.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Arnaud Pouliquen <arnaud.pouliquen@foss.st.com>
> ---
> Updates from version V11:
> - fix typo in @release_fw comment
> ---
>  drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c | 5 +++++
>  include/linux/remoteproc.h           | 3 +++
>  2 files changed, 8 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> index 7694817f25d4..46863e1ca307 100644
> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> @@ -1258,6 +1258,9 @@ static int rproc_alloc_registered_carveouts(struct rproc *rproc)
>  
>  static void rproc_release_fw(struct rproc *rproc)
>  {
> +	if (rproc->ops->release_fw)
> +		rproc->ops->release_fw(rproc);
> +
>  	/* Free the copy of the resource table */
>  	kfree(rproc->cached_table);
>  	rproc->cached_table = NULL;
> @@ -1377,6 +1380,8 @@ static int rproc_start(struct rproc *rproc, const struct firmware *fw)
>  unprepare_subdevices:
>  	rproc_unprepare_subdevices(rproc);
>  reset_table_ptr:
> +	if (rproc->ops->release_fw)
> +		rproc->ops->release_fw(rproc);

I always thought that looked hackish and brittle.  I am trying to find a better
solution.

Mathieu

>  	rproc->table_ptr = rproc->cached_table;
>  
>  	return ret;
> diff --git a/include/linux/remoteproc.h b/include/linux/remoteproc.h
> index 2e0ddcb2d792..08e0187a84d9 100644
> --- a/include/linux/remoteproc.h
> +++ b/include/linux/remoteproc.h
> @@ -381,6 +381,8 @@ enum rsc_handling_status {
>   * @panic:	optional callback to react to system panic, core will delay
>   *		panic at least the returned number of milliseconds
>   * @coredump:	  collect firmware dump after the subsystem is shutdown
> + * @release_fw:	optional function to release the firmware image from ROM memories.
> + *		This function is called after stopping the remote processor or in case of an error
>   */
>  struct rproc_ops {
>  	int (*prepare)(struct rproc *rproc);
> @@ -403,6 +405,7 @@ struct rproc_ops {
>  	u64 (*get_boot_addr)(struct rproc *rproc, const struct firmware *fw);
>  	unsigned long (*panic)(struct rproc *rproc);
>  	void (*coredump)(struct rproc *rproc);
> +	void (*release_fw)(struct rproc *rproc);
>  };
>  
>  /**
> -- 
> 2.25.1
>