remoteproc: maintain a generic child device for each rproc
For each registered rproc, maintain a generic remoteproc device whose parent is the low level platform-specific device (commonly a pdev, but it may certainly be any other type of device too). With this in hand, the resulting device hierarchy might then look like: omap-rproc.0 | - remoteproc0 <---- new ! | - virtio0 | - virtio1 | - rpmsg0 | - rpmsg1 | - rpmsg2 Where: - omap-rproc.0 is the low level device that's bound to the driver which invokes rproc_register() - remoteproc0 is the result of this patch, and will be added by the remoteproc framework when rproc_register() is invoked - virtio0 and virtio1 are vdevs that are registered by remoteproc when it realizes that they are supported by the firmware of the physical remote processor represented by omap-rproc.0 - rpmsg0, rpmsg1 and rpmsg2 are rpmsg devices that represent rpmsg channels, and are registerd by the rpmsg bus when it gets notified about their existence Technically, this patch: - changes 'struct rproc' to contain this generic remoteproc.x device - creates a new "remoteproc" type, to which this new generic remoteproc.x device belong to. - adds a super simple enumeration method for the indices of the remoteproc.x devices - updates all dev_* messaging to use the generic remoteproc.x device instead of the low level platform-specific device - updates all dma_* allocations to use the parent of remoteproc.x (where the platform-specific memory pools, most commonly CMA, are to be found) Adding this generic device has several merits: - we can now add remoteproc runtime PM support simply by hooking onto the new "remoteproc" type - all remoteproc log messages will now carry a common name prefix instead of having a platform-specific one - having a device as part of the rproc struct makes it possible to simplify refcounting (see subsequent patch) Thanks to Stephen Boyd <sboyd@codeaurora.org> for suggesting and discussing these ideas in one of the remoteproc review threads and to Fernando Guzman Lugo <fernando.lugo@ti.com> for trying them out with the (upcoming) runtime PM support for remoteproc. Cc: Fernando Guzman Lugo <fernando.lugo@ti.com> Reviewed-by: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@codeaurora.org> Signed-off-by: Ohad Ben-Cohen <ohad@wizery.com>
Showing
This diff is collapsed.
Please register or sign in to comment