On 2/4/26 8:21 AM, Deepak Kumar Singh wrote: > > On 1/30/2026 6:16 AM, Chris Lew wrote: >> On Thu, Jan 29, 2026 at 04:26:38PM +0530, Deepak Kumar Singh wrote: >>> On 1/27/2026 6:25 PM, Konrad Dybcio wrote: >>>> On 1/27/26 11:38 AM, Deepak Kumar Singh wrote: >>>>> From: Chris Lew <[email protected]> >>>>> >>>>> A remoteproc booted during earlier boot stages such as UEFI or the >>>>> bootloader, may need to be attached to without restarting the remoteproc >>>>> hardware. To do this the remoteproc will need to check the ready and >>>>> handover states in smp2p without an interrupt notification. Create >>>>> qcom_smp2p_start_in() to initialize the shadow state without notifying >>>>> clients because these early events happened in the past. >>>>> >>>>> Add support for the .irq_get_irqchip_state callback so remoteproc can >>>>> read the current state of the fatal, ready and handover bits. >>>>> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Chris Lew <[email protected]> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Deepak Kumar Singh <[email protected]> >>>>> --- >>>>> drivers/soc/qcom/smp2p.c | 55 >>>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >>>>> 1 file changed, 55 insertions(+) >>>>> >>>>> diff --git a/drivers/soc/qcom/smp2p.c b/drivers/soc/qcom/smp2p.c >>>>> index cb515c2340c1..c27ffb44b825 100644 >>>>> --- a/drivers/soc/qcom/smp2p.c >>>>> +++ b/drivers/soc/qcom/smp2p.c >>>>> @@ -222,6 +222,39 @@ static void qcom_smp2p_negotiate(struct qcom_smp2p >>>>> *smp2p) >>>>> } >>>>> } >>>>> +static void qcom_smp2p_start_in(struct qcom_smp2p *smp2p) >>>>> +{ >>>>> + unsigned int smem_id = smp2p->smem_items[SMP2P_INBOUND]; >>>>> + unsigned int pid = smp2p->remote_pid; >>>>> + char buf[SMP2P_MAX_ENTRY_NAME]; >>>>> + struct smp2p_smem_item *in; >>>>> + struct smp2p_entry *entry; >>>>> + size_t size; >>>>> + int i; >>>>> + >>>>> + in = qcom_smem_get(pid, smem_id, &size); >>>>> + if (IS_ERR(in)) >>>>> + return; >>>>> + >>>>> + smp2p->in = in; >>>>> + >>>>> + /* Check if version is initialized by the remote. */ >>>>> + if (in->version == 0) >>>>> + return; >>>>> + >>>>> + for (i = smp2p->valid_entries; i < in->valid_entries; i++) { >>>>> + list_for_each_entry(entry, &smp2p->inbound, node) { >>>>> + memcpy(buf, in->entries[i].name, sizeof(buf)); >>>> Is there a reason for this copy at all? >>> I don't see a compelling reason. This code snippet is same as present in >>> qcom_smp2p_notify_in(). >> My understanding was that we do this copy because we don't want to do a >> strcmp on memory that the remote could change at any time. Maybe it's >> overkill but I thought it was considered good practice and as Deepak >> mentioned, it is similarly present in qcom_smp2p_notify_in(). >> >>>> [...] >>>> >>>>> + /* Check inbound entries in the case of early boot processor */ >>>> "in case a remote processor has already been started"? >>> This i can update in case new patch set is required. >>>> Konrad > > Are you expecting new patch for this update or current one is ok?
I don't have any more comments. Bjorn left a review on the previous version so I'd be happy to see him ack this Konrad
