[PATCH v3 2/4] soc: amlogic: meson-gx-socinfo-sm: Add Amlogic secure-monitor SoC Information driver
Krzysztof Kozlowski
krzysztof.kozlowski at linaro.org
Thu Mar 14 00:11:57 PDT 2024
On 14/03/2024 07:59, Viacheslav Bocharov wrote:
> Amlogic SoCs have a SoC information secure-monitor call for SoC type,
> package type, revision information and chipid.
> This patchs adds support for secure-monitor call decoding and exposing
> with the SoC bus infrastructure in addition to the previous SoC
> Information driver.
>
> Signed-off-by: Viacheslav Bocharov <adeep at lexina.in>
> ---
> drivers/soc/amlogic/Kconfig | 10 ++
> drivers/soc/amlogic/Makefile | 1 +
> drivers/soc/amlogic/meson-gx-socinfo-sm.c | 192 ++++++++++++++++++++++
> 3 files changed, 203 insertions(+)
> create mode 100644 drivers/soc/amlogic/meson-gx-socinfo-sm.c
>
> diff --git a/drivers/soc/amlogic/Kconfig b/drivers/soc/amlogic/Kconfig
> index d08e398bdad4..82fc77ca3b4b 100644
> --- a/drivers/soc/amlogic/Kconfig
> +++ b/drivers/soc/amlogic/Kconfig
> @@ -26,6 +26,16 @@ config MESON_GX_SOCINFO
> Say yes to support decoding of Amlogic Meson GX SoC family
> information about the type, package and version.
>
> +config MESON_GX_SOCINFO_SM
> + bool "Amlogic Meson GX SoC Information driver via Secure Monitor"
> + depends on (ARM64 && ARCH_MESON || COMPILE_TEST) && MESON_SM=y
> + default ARCH_MESON && MESON_SM
> + select SOC_BUS
> + help
> + Say yes to support decoding of Amlogic Meson GX SoC family
> + information about the type, package and version via secure
> + monitor call.
> +
I wonder, why do you need socinfo driver per each SoC? Usually it is one
or two per entire arch.
> +
> +static int meson_gx_socinfo_sm_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> +{
> + struct soc_device_attribute *soc_dev_attr;
> + struct soc_device *soc_dev;
> + struct device_node *sm_np;
> + struct meson_sm_firmware *fw;
> + struct regmap *regmap;
> + union meson_cpu_id socinfo;
> + struct device *dev;
> + int ret;
> +
> + /* check if chip-id is available */
> + if (!of_property_read_bool(pdev->dev.of_node, "amlogic,has-chip-id"))
> + return -ENODEV;
> +
> + /* node should be a syscon */
> + regmap = syscon_node_to_regmap(pdev->dev.of_node);
> + if (IS_ERR(regmap)) {
> + dev_err(&pdev->dev, "failed to get regmap\n");
Syntax is:
return dev_err_probe()
> + return -ENODEV;
Anyway wrong return code, use the real one you got.
> + }
> +
> + sm_np = of_parse_phandle(pdev->dev.of_node, "secure-monitor", 0);
> + if (!sm_np) {
> + dev_err(&pdev->dev, "no secure-monitor node found\n");
> + return -ENODEV;
-EINVAL
> + }
> +
> + fw = meson_sm_get(sm_np);
> + of_node_put(sm_np);
> + if (!fw) {
> + dev_info(&pdev->dev, "secure-monitor device not ready, probe later\n");
No, you never print messages on deferred probe.
> + return -EPROBE_DEFER;
> + }
> +
> + ret = regmap_read(regmap, AO_SEC_SOCINFO_OFFSET, &socinfo.raw);
> + if (ret < 0)
> + return ret;
> +
> + if (!socinfo.raw) {
> + dev_err(&pdev->dev, "invalid regmap chipid value\n");
> + return -EINVAL;
> + }
> +
> + soc_dev_attr = devm_kzalloc(&pdev->dev, sizeof(*soc_dev_attr),
> + GFP_KERNEL);
> + if (!soc_dev_attr)
> + return -ENOMEM;
> +
> + soc_dev_attr->serial_number = socinfo_get_chipid(&pdev->dev, fw, &socinfo);
> +
> + soc_dev_attr->family = "Amlogic Meson";
> + soc_dev_attr->revision = kasprintf(GFP_KERNEL, "%x:%x - %x:%x",
> + socinfo.v1.major_id,
> + socinfo.v1.chip_rev,
> + socinfo.v1.pack_id,
> + (socinfo.v1.reserved<<4) + socinfo.v1.layout_ver);
> + soc_dev_attr->soc_id = kasprintf(GFP_KERNEL, "%s (%s)",
> + socinfo_v1_to_soc_id(socinfo),
> + socinfo_v1_to_package_id(socinfo));
> +
> + soc_dev = soc_device_register(soc_dev_attr);
> +
> +
> + if (IS_ERR(soc_dev)) {
> + kfree(soc_dev_attr->revision);
> + kfree_const(soc_dev_attr->soc_id);
> + kfree(soc_dev_attr);
That's a double free. This was not tested.
> + return PTR_ERR(soc_dev);
> + }
> +
> + dev = soc_device_to_device(soc_dev);
> + platform_set_drvdata(pdev, soc_dev);
> +
> + dev_info(dev, "Amlogic Meson %s Revision %x:%x (%x:%x) Detected (SM)\n",
> + soc_dev_attr->soc_id,
> + socinfo.v1.major_id,
> + socinfo.v1.chip_rev,
> + socinfo.v1.pack_id,
> + (socinfo.v1.reserved<<4) + socinfo.v1.layout_ver);
> +
> + return PTR_ERR_OR_ZERO(dev);
> +}
> +
> +
> +static int meson_gx_socinfo_sm_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
> +{
> + struct soc_device *soc_dev = platform_get_drvdata(pdev);
> +
> + soc_device_unregister(soc_dev);
If you free the memory in probe() error path, why you did not decide to
free it here as well? It is symmetrical, so this should make you wonder
- error path is wrong.
Best regards,
Krzysztof
More information about the linux-amlogic
mailing list