Re: [PATCH] remoteproc: pru: future-proof PRU ID matching

[David Lechner]

On 1/28/21 4:55 PM, Suman Anna wrote:
> Hi David,
>
> On 1/15/21 6:53 PM, Suman Anna wrote:
> > On 1/4/21 3:18 PM, David Lechner wrote:
> > >   static int pru_rproc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > > @@ -825,20 +808,28 @@ static int pru_rproc_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > >   
> > >   static const struct pru_private_data pru_data = {
> > >   	.type = PRU_TYPE_PRU,
> > > +	.pru0_iram_offset = 0x4000,
> > > +	.pru1_iram_offset = 0x8000,
>
> The offsets for the PRU cores are actually 0x34000 and 0x38000 respectively from
> the base of the PRUSS on non-Davinci SoCs.
>
> If we were to use this static data approach, then we might as well continue to
> use the current address masking logic with the appropriate masks for Davinci
> (0x38000 and 0x3C000, not true offsets but as masks they would work). Davinci
> PRUSS is the only one with its differences being the first PRUSS IP, and I would
> prefer to keep the logic aligned to the IPs on all the recent SoCs on 3
> different TI SoC families (OMAP, Keystone 2 and K3).
>
> Let me know what you think.

I'm not too picky as long as it works. :-)

If keeping the static data to a minimum is really important, I suppose we could
introduce a new type = PRU_TYPE_PRU_V1 for these PRUSSs instead. It sounds like
this information might be useful elsewhere anyway.