20 Sep
2019
20 Sep
'19
10:45 a.m.
On 20. 09. 19 10:26, Simon Goldschmidt wrote:
Michal Simek <michal.simek@xilinx.com mailto:michal.simek@xilinx.com> schrieb am Fr., 20. Sep. 2019, 10:17:
On 19. 09. 19 16:35, Simon Goldschmidt wrote: > > > Michal Simek <michal.simek@xilinx.com <mailto:michal.simek@xilinx.com> <mailto:michal.simek@xilinx.com <mailto:michal.simek@xilinx.com>>> > schrieb am Do., 19. Sep. 2019, 16:22: > > On 17. 09. 19 14:53, Simon Goldschmidt wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 2:48 PM Michal Simek > <michal.simek@xilinx.com <mailto:michal.simek@xilinx.com> <mailto:michal.simek@xilinx.com <mailto:michal.simek@xilinx.com>>> wrote: > >> > >> On 17. 09. 19 14:43, Simon Goldschmidt wrote: > >>> On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 1:22 PM Michal Simek > <michal.simek@xilinx.com <mailto:michal.simek@xilinx.com> <mailto:michal.simek@xilinx.com <mailto:michal.simek@xilinx.com>>> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> From: Ashok Reddy Soma <ashok.reddy.soma@xilinx.com <mailto:ashok.reddy.soma@xilinx.com> > <mailto:ashok.reddy.soma@xilinx.com <mailto:ashok.reddy.soma@xilinx.com>>> > >>>> > >>>> When two instances of AXI QSPI with flash are added and tested > >>>> simultaneously the spi driver operations are relocated twice. > >>>> As a result code is accessing addresses outside of RAM when > >>>> relocated second time which is causing a crash. > >>>> > >>>> Tested on Microblaze. > >>>> > >>>> Similar change was done in past by: > >>>> commit f238b3f0fbc9 ("watchdog: dm: Support manual relocation > for watchdogs") > >>>> commit 2588f2ddfd60 ("dm: sf: Add support for all targets which > requires MANUAL_RELOC") > >>>> commit 1b4c2aa25bdf ("gpio: dm: Support manual relocation for > gpio") > >>>> > >>>> Signed-off-by: Ashok Reddy Soma <ashok.reddy.soma@xilinx.com <mailto:ashok.reddy.soma@xilinx.com> > <mailto:ashok.reddy.soma@xilinx.com <mailto:ashok.reddy.soma@xilinx.com>>> > >>>> Signed-off-by: Michal Simek <michal.simek@xilinx.com <mailto:michal.simek@xilinx.com> > <mailto:michal.simek@xilinx.com <mailto:michal.simek@xilinx.com>>> > >>>> --- > >>>> > >>>> drivers/spi/spi-uclass.c | 34 +++++++++++++++++++--------------- > >>>> 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-) > >>>> > >>>> diff --git a/drivers/spi/spi-uclass.c b/drivers/spi/spi-uclass.c > >>>> index 88cb2a126227..6d63006d186c 100644 > >>>> --- a/drivers/spi/spi-uclass.c > >>>> +++ b/drivers/spi/spi-uclass.c > >>>> @@ -129,21 +129,25 @@ static int spi_post_probe(struct udevice > *bus) > >>>> #endif > >>>> #if defined(CONFIG_NEEDS_MANUAL_RELOC) > >>>> struct dm_spi_ops *ops = spi_get_ops(bus); > >>>> - > >>>> - if (ops->claim_bus) > >>>> - ops->claim_bus += gd->reloc_off; > >>>> - if (ops->release_bus) > >>>> - ops->release_bus += gd->reloc_off; > >>>> - if (ops->set_wordlen) > >>>> - ops->set_wordlen += gd->reloc_off; > >>>> - if (ops->xfer) > >>>> - ops->xfer += gd->reloc_off; > >>>> - if (ops->set_speed) > >>>> - ops->set_speed += gd->reloc_off; > >>>> - if (ops->set_mode) > >>>> - ops->set_mode += gd->reloc_off; > >>>> - if (ops->cs_info) > >>>> - ops->cs_info += gd->reloc_off; > >>>> + static int reloc_done; > >>> > >>> So with CONFIG_NEEDS_MANUAL_RELOC, we don't support multiple > >>> (differen) spi (or watchdog, sf, gpio) drivers? > >> > >> If you look at commits above you will see that several subsystems > >> support multiple instances already. > >> We can check others as well. > > > > I have looked at the commits above, that's why I ask. To me, this code > > relocates the ops of the device called first. If a second device > has different > > ops, it won't get relocated, or am I wrong? > > > > Given your other similar commits that were already accepted, I > don't want to > > hold this one, but I still would like to understand. > > I think you are right. It should be called once per driver and after > relocation. That means that this should be the part variable should be > the part of every ops and there should be also handling in connection to > bind/unbind method. > On microblaze which is one architecture common systems only one driver > is in place that's why none has found any issue with it. > > Let me play with this a little bit to see if we can setup system with > also bind/unbind to see how this is exactly working. > > > Right, that's what I came to when thinking about it again. That way, it > could even be the framework that relocates all ops... Framework is doing it already but we should do it without static variable.Right, it's done in the UCLASSes. What I meant was it could already be done in the core DM framework.
DM framework could call it and we can get it out of post_probe functions but still actual relocation should be likely done in uclasses because every device type has different ops.
Thanks, Michal