[RESEND PATCH v2 09/15] ASoC: qcom: qdsp6: Add support to Q6CORE

[Srinivas Kandagatla]

Thanks for the review.

On 02/01/18 22:15, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
> On Thu 14 Dec 09:33 PST 2017, srinivas.kandagatla at linaro.org wrote:
> 
>> From: Srinivas Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla at linaro.org>
>>
>> This patch adds support to core apr service, which is used to query
>> status of other static and dynamic services on the dsp.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Srinivas Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla at linaro.org>
>> ---
>>   sound/soc/qcom/Kconfig        |   5 +
>>   sound/soc/qcom/qdsp6/Makefile |   1 +
>>   sound/soc/qcom/qdsp6/q6core.c | 227 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>   3 files changed, 233 insertions(+)
>>   create mode 100644 sound/soc/qcom/qdsp6/q6core.c
>>

>> +obj-$(CONFIG_SND_SOC_QDSP6_CORE) += q6core.o
>> diff --git a/sound/soc/qcom/qdsp6/q6core.c b/sound/soc/qcom/qdsp6/q6core.c
>> new file mode 100644
>> index 000000000000..d4e2dbc62489

>> +struct q6core {
>> +	struct apr_device *adev;
>> +	wait_queue_head_t wait;
>> +	uint32_t avcs_state;
>> +	int resp_received;
> 
> bool

yep.

> 
>> +	uint32_t num_services;
>> +	struct avcs_svc_info *svcs_info;
>> +};

>> +static int core_callback(struct apr_device *adev, struct apr_client_data *data)
>> +{
>> +	struct q6core *core = dev_get_drvdata(&adev->dev);
>> +	uint32_t *payload;
>> +
>> +	switch (data->opcode) {
>> +	case AVCS_GET_VERSIONS_RSP:
>> +		payload = data->payload;
>> +		core->num_services = payload[1];
> 
> Describe the payload in a struct (with flexible array member for the
> svcs_info list).

sure!
> 
>> +
>> +		if (!core->svcs_info)
>> +			core->svcs_info = kcalloc(core->num_services,
>> +						  sizeof(*core->svcs_info),
>> +						  GFP_ATOMIC);
>> +		if (!core->svcs_info)
>> +			return -ENOMEM;
>> +
> 
> If we receive this twice with different num_services for some reason the
> memcpy might trash the heap.
> 
> But as this is the get_version response and we're only going to issue
> that once you should remove the check for !core->svcs_info above.
>
yes, I agree

> And don't forget to free svcs_info once you have added your services.
yep.
> 
>> +		/* svc info is after 8 bytes */
>> +		memcpy(core->svcs_info, payload + 2,
>> +		       core->num_services * sizeof(*core->svcs_info));
>> +
>> +		core->resp_received = 1;
>> +		wake_up(&core->wait);
>> +
>> +		break;
>> +	case AVCS_CMDRSP_ADSP_EVENT_GET_STATE:
>> +		payload = data->payload;
>> +		core->avcs_state = payload[0];
>> +
>> +		core->resp_received = 1;
>> +		wake_up(&core->wait);
>> +		break;
>> +	default:
>> +		dev_err(&adev->dev, "Message id from adsp core svc: 0x%x\n",
>> +			data->opcode);
>> +		break;
>> +	}
>> +
>> +	return 0;
>> +}
>> +
>> +void q6core_add_service(struct device *dev, uint32_t svc_id, uint32_t version)
>> +{
>> +	int i;
>> +
>> +	for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(static_services); i++) {
>> +		if (static_services[i].svc_id == svc_id) {
>> +			static_services[i].svc_version = version;
>> +			apr_add_device(dev->parent, &static_services[i]);
>> +			dev_info(dev,
> 
> Please don't spam the logs, dev_dbg() should be enough. And as
> apr_add_device() returns you can find the devices registered in /sys
sure!

> 
>> +				"Adding SVC: %s: id 0x%x API Ver 0x%x:0x%x\n",
>> +				 static_services[i].name, svc_id,
>> +				 APR_SVC_MAJOR_VERSION(version),
>> +				 APR_SVC_MINOR_VERSION(version));
>> +		}
>> +	}
>> +}
>> +
>> +static void q6core_add_static_services(struct q6core *core)
> 
> The name of this function is deceiving, it doesn't really add the static
> services. It adds devices for the services that we've been informed
> exists, by the other side - using the static list of services.
> 
> Per the comment on a previous patch I don't think the "name" in
> apr_device_id provides any real value and in this case if forces you to
> perform a lookup using this table.
> 
> If you drop the name, you can loop over the list of service ids returned
> from the remote and just register them with a hard coded domain id
> (based on apr instance?) and client_id. You don't need the lookup table.
> 
yes, correct.

>> +{
>> +	int i;
>> +	struct apr_device *adev = core->adev;
>> +	struct avcs_svc_info *svcs_info = core->svcs_info;
>> +
>> +	for (i = 0; i < core->num_services; i++)
>> +		q6core_add_service(&adev->dev, svcs_info[i].service_id,
>> +				   svcs_info[i].version);
>> +}
>> +
>> +static int q6core_get_svc_versions(struct q6core *core)
>> +{
>> +	struct apr_device *adev = core->adev;
>> +	struct apr_hdr hdr = {0};
>> +	int rc;
>> +
>> +	hdr.hdr_field = APR_HDR_FIELD(APR_MSG_TYPE_SEQ_CMD,
>> +				      APR_HDR_LEN(APR_HDR_SIZE), APR_PKT_VER);
>> +	hdr.pkt_size = APR_PKT_SIZE(APR_HDR_SIZE, 0);
>> +	hdr.opcode = AVCS_GET_VERSIONS;
>> +
>> +	rc = apr_send_pkt(adev, (uint32_t *)&hdr);
>> +	if (rc < 0)
>> +		return rc;
>> +
>> +	rc = wait_event_timeout(core->wait, (core->resp_received == 1),
>> +				msecs_to_jiffies(Q6_READY_TIMEOUT_MS));
> 
> The wait and resp_received could favourably be expressed as a completion
> instead, as all we care about is that this happened once.

will give that a try.
> 
>> +	if (rc > 0 && core->resp_received) {
>> +		core->resp_received = 0;
>> +		return 0;
>> +	}
> 
> It wasn't obvious at first sight that this is the success case and the
> return rc below was the error case...
> 
okay, I can add some comments here to help.
>> +
>> +	return rc;
> 
> And this will actually be 0 if core->resp_received has not become 1 at
> the timeout.
> 
yep, will return an error value here.

>> +}
>> +
>> +static bool q6core_is_adsp_ready(struct q6core *core)
>> +{
>> +	struct apr_device *adev = core->adev;
>> +	struct apr_hdr hdr = {0};
>> +	int rc;
>> +
>> +	hdr.hdr_field = APR_HDR_FIELD(APR_MSG_TYPE_SEQ_CMD,
>> +				      APR_HDR_LEN(APR_HDR_SIZE), APR_PKT_VER);
>> +	hdr.pkt_size = APR_PKT_SIZE(APR_HDR_SIZE, 0);
>> +	hdr.opcode = AVCS_CMD_ADSP_EVENT_GET_STATE;
>> +
>> +	rc = apr_send_pkt(adev, (uint32_t *)&hdr);
>> +	if (rc < 0)
>> +		return false;
>> +
>> +	rc = wait_event_timeout(core->wait, (core->resp_received == 1),
>> +				msecs_to_jiffies(Q6_READY_TIMEOUT_MS));
> 
> I think this too would be nicer to describe with a completion.
> 
> Currently it's possible to ask is the dsp is ready, time out and ask
> again, just to receive the first ack and continue. The service request
> sleep might then wake up on this previous ack.
> 
> If you describe this by two different completions for the two waits you
> avoid any such race conditions occurring.
> 
sure i will make a note of it when I try completions.

>> +	if (rc > 0 && core->resp_received) {
>> +		core->resp_received = 0;
>> +		if (core->avcs_state == 0x1)
>> +			return true;
>> +	}
>> +
>> +	return false;
>> +}
>> +
>> +static int q6core_probe(struct apr_device *adev)
>> +{
>> +	struct q6core *core;
>> +	unsigned long  timeout = jiffies +
>> +				 msecs_to_jiffies(ADSP_STATE_READY_TIMEOUT_MS);
>> +	int ret = 0;
>> +
>> +	core = devm_kzalloc(&adev->dev, sizeof(*core), GFP_KERNEL);
>> +	if (!core)
>> +		return -ENOMEM;
>> +
>> +	dev_set_drvdata(&adev->dev, core);
>> +
>> +	core->adev = adev;
>> +	init_waitqueue_head(&core->wait);
>> +
>> +	do {
>> +		if (!q6core_is_adsp_ready(core)) {
>> +			dev_info(&adev->dev, "ADSP Audio isn't ready\n");
>> +		} else {
>> +			dev_info(&adev->dev, "ADSP Audio is ready\n");
>> +
>> +			ret = q6core_get_svc_versions(core);
>> +			if (!ret)
>> +				q6core_add_static_services(core);
>> +
>> +			break;
>> +		}
>> +	} while (time_after(timeout, jiffies));
> 
> This would be much better rewritten as:
> 
> for (;;) {
> 	if (q6core_is_adsp_ready(core))
> 		break;
> 
> 	if (time_after(timeout, jiffies))
> 		return -ETIMEDOUT;
> }
> 
> ret = q6core_get_svc_versions(core);
> if (ret)
> 	return ret;
> 
> q6core_add_static_services(core);
> 

Sure.

>> +
>> +	return ret;
>> +}
>> +
>> +
>> +static struct apr_driver qcom_q6core_driver = {
>> +	.probe = q6core_probe,
>> +	.remove = q6core_exit,
>> +	.callback = core_callback,
>> +	.id_table = core_id,
>> +	.driver = {
>> +		   .name = "qcom-q6core",
>> +		   },
> 
> Indentation.
Sure.