On 11/4/25 8:35 AM, Mukesh Ojha wrote:
> Qualcomm remote processor may rely on static and dynamic resources for
> it to be functional. For most of the Qualcomm SoCs, when run with Gunyah
> or older QHEE hypervisor, all the resources whether it is static or
> dynamic, is managed by the hypervisor. Dynamic resources if it is
> present for a remote processor will always be coming from secure world
> via SMC call while static resources may be present in remote processor
> firmware binary or it may be coming from SMC call along with dynamic
> resources.
[...]
> + /*
> + * Qualcomm remote processor may rely on static and dynamic resources
> for
> + * it to be functional. For most of the Qualcomm SoCs, when run with
> Gunyah
> + * or older QHEE hypervisor, all the resources whether it is static or
> dynamic,
> + * is managed by present hypervisor. Dynamic resources if it is present
> for
> + * a remote processor will always be coming from secure world via SMC
> call
> + * while static resources may be present in remote processor firmware
> binary
> + * or it may be coming from SMC call along with dynamic resources.
How about:
"""
The resources consumed by Qualcomm remote processors fall into two categories:
static (such as the memory carveouts for the rproc firmware) and dynamic (like
shared memory pools).
Both are managed by a Qualcomm hypervisor (such as QHEE or Gunyah), if one is
present.
Otherwise, a resource table must be retrieved via an SCM call. That table will
list all dynamic resources (if any) and possibly the static ones.
The static resources may also come from a resource table embedded in the rproc
firmware instead.
"""
?
> + *
> + * Here, we call rproc_elf_load_rsc_table() to check firmware binary
> has resources
> + * or not and if it is not having then we pass NULL and zero as input
> resource
> + * table pointer and size respectively to the argument of
> qcom_scm_pas_get_rsc_table()
> + * and this is even true for Qualcomm remote processor who does follow
> remoteproc
> + * framework.
> + */
> + ret = qcom_scm_pas_get_rsc_table(pas->pas_ctx, table, table_sz,
> &output_rt,
> + &output_rt_size);
> + if (ret) {
> + dev_err(pas->dev, "Error in getting resource table: %d\n", ret);
> + return ret;
> + }
> +
> + kfree(rproc->cached_table);
Would this not simply discard the firmware binary table in the "split case"?
Konrad
> + rproc->cached_table = output_rt;
> + rproc->table_ptr = rproc->cached_table;
> + rproc->table_sz = output_rt_size;
> +
> + return ret;
> +}
> +
> static unsigned long qcom_pas_panic(struct rproc *rproc)
> {
> struct qcom_pas *pas = rproc->priv;
> @@ -425,7 +481,7 @@ static const struct rproc_ops qcom_pas_ops = {
> .start = qcom_pas_start,
> .stop = qcom_pas_stop,
> .da_to_va = qcom_pas_da_to_va,
> - .parse_fw = qcom_register_dump_segments,
> + .parse_fw = qcom_pas_parse_firmware,
> .load = qcom_pas_load,
> .panic = qcom_pas_panic,
> };
> @@ -435,7 +491,7 @@ static const struct rproc_ops qcom_pas_minidump_ops = {
> .start = qcom_pas_start,
> .stop = qcom_pas_stop,
> .da_to_va = qcom_pas_da_to_va,
> - .parse_fw = qcom_register_dump_segments,
> + .parse_fw = qcom_pas_parse_firmware,
> .load = qcom_pas_load,
> .panic = qcom_pas_panic,
> .coredump = qcom_pas_minidump,
>
