Re: [PATCH 4/5] remoteproc: stm32: Allow hold boot management by the SCMI reset controller

[Arnaud POULIQUEN]

On 4/5/23 20:01, Mathieu Poirier wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 31, 2023 at 05:46:50PM +0200, Arnaud Pouliquen wrote:
>> The hold boot can be managed by the SCMI controller as a reset.
>> If the "hold_boot" reset is defined in the device tree, use it.
>> Else use the syscon controller directly to access to the register.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Arnaud Pouliquen <arnaud.pouliquen@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>>  drivers/remoteproc/stm32_rproc.c | 34 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++------
>>  1 file changed, 28 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/stm32_rproc.c b/drivers/remoteproc/stm32_rproc.c
>> index 4be651e734ee..6b0d8f30a5c7 100644
>> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/stm32_rproc.c
>> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/stm32_rproc.c
>> @@ -78,6 +78,7 @@ struct stm32_mbox {
>>  
>>  struct stm32_rproc {
>>  	struct reset_control *rst;
>> +	struct reset_control *hold_boot_rst;
>>  	struct stm32_syscon hold_boot;
>>  	struct stm32_syscon pdds;
>>  	struct stm32_syscon m4_state;
>> @@ -398,6 +399,14 @@ static int stm32_rproc_set_hold_boot(struct rproc *rproc, bool hold)
>>  	struct stm32_syscon hold_boot = ddata->hold_boot;
>>  	int val, err;
>>  
>> +	if (ddata->hold_boot_rst) {
>> +		/* Use the SCMI reset controller */
>> +		if (!hold)
>> +			return reset_control_deassert(ddata->hold_boot_rst);
>> +		else
>> +			return reset_control_assert(ddata->hold_boot_rst);
>> +	}
>> +
>>  	val = hold ? HOLD_BOOT : RELEASE_BOOT;
>>  
>>  	err = regmap_update_bits(hold_boot.map, hold_boot.reg,
>> @@ -693,16 +702,29 @@ static int stm32_rproc_parse_dt(struct platform_device *pdev,
>>  		dev_info(dev, "wdg irq registered\n");
>>  	}
>>  
>> -	ddata->rst = devm_reset_control_get_by_index(dev, 0);
>> +	ddata->rst = devm_reset_control_get(dev, "mcu_rst");
> 
> Peng is correct - newer kernels won't be able to boot with older DT.
> 
>>  	if (IS_ERR(ddata->rst))
>>  		return dev_err_probe(dev, PTR_ERR(ddata->rst),
>>  				     "failed to get mcu_reset\n");
>>  
>> -	err = stm32_rproc_get_syscon(np, "st,syscfg-holdboot",
>> -				     &ddata->hold_boot);
>> -	if (err) {
>> -		dev_err(dev, "failed to get hold boot\n");
>> -		return err;
>> +	ddata->hold_boot_rst = devm_reset_control_get(dev, "hold_boot");
>> +	if (IS_ERR(ddata->hold_boot_rst)) {
>> +		if (PTR_ERR(ddata->hold_boot_rst) == -EPROBE_DEFER)
>> +			return PTR_ERR(ddata->hold_boot_rst);
>> +		ddata->hold_boot_rst = NULL;
>> +	}
>> +
>> +	if (!ddata->hold_boot_rst) {Okay, I definitely need to rewrite the patchset.
> 
> Why another if() statement?  The code below should be in the above if()...
> 
> This patchset is surprizingly confusing for its size.  I suggest paying
> attention to the changelogs and adding comments in the code.

I definitely need to rewrite this patchset.

Thanks for all reviewers
Regards
Arnaud

> 
> Thanks,
> Mathieu
> 
>> +		/*
>> +		 * If the hold boot is not managed by the SCMI reset controller,
>> +		 * manage it through the syscon controller
>> +		 */
>> +		err = stm32_rproc_get_syscon(np, "st,syscfg-holdboot",
>> +					     &ddata->hold_boot);
>> +		if (err) {
>> +			dev_err(dev, "failed to get hold boot\n");
>> +			return err;
>> +		}
>>  	}
>>  
>>  	err = stm32_rproc_get_syscon(np, "st,syscfg-pdds", &ddata->pdds);
>> -- 
>> 2.25.1
>>