-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 897
remoteproc: adi: adding crc check for LDR headers #2912
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
base: adsp-main-6.12
Are you sure you want to change the base?
remoteproc: adi: adding crc check for LDR headers #2912
Conversation
@@ -132,10 +138,10 @@ static struct adi_sharc_resource_table _rsc_table_template = { | |||
}, | |||
}; | |||
|
|||
enum adi_rproc_rpmsg_state { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think these changes require a separate commit since they dont really contribute to the feature.
Also, if RPMsg and remoteproc are sharing a common structure/flags/states, would it be a better idea to look at a common abstraction layer that just plugs into the two interfaces? if so, do we need these changes for now?
} | ||
if (ret) { | ||
dev_err(rproc_data->dev, "Fail to request ICC IRQ\n"); | ||
if (!rproc_data->adi_rsc_table) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
same...
} | ||
|
||
return 0; | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
if (rproc_data->verify) | ||
dev_info(rproc_data->dev, | ||
"Verified and loaded ldr\n"); | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
In the future if you are linting a source file (e.g. fixing line length) and making functional changes it would be nice to separate them into different commits |
rproc_data->icc_irq_flags = IRQF_PERCPU | IRQF_SHARED | IRQF_ONESHOT; | ||
|
||
irq_flags = IRQF_PERCPU | IRQF_SHARED | IRQF_ONESHOT; | ||
rproc_data->icc_irq_flags = irq_flags; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The extra variable shouldn't be necessary if it is just fixing the line length
|
||
rproc_data = (struct adi_rproc_data *)rproc->priv; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I assume this isn't a line length issue since the function header is longer?
* In case of Direct Code Execution and Single block boot streams it is possible | ||
* to verify the block header via an xor checksum of the bcode_flag field. | ||
*/ | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
} | ||
|
||
/* Prepare in advance for an empty final block */ | ||
final_hdr_empty = !!(is_final_and_empty(next_hdr)); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Why add !!
here?
curr_hdr_xor_checksum); | ||
return -EINVAL; | ||
} | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
98612ef
to
3b2ee5c
Compare
Checks checksum of LDR Section headers.
PR Type
PR Checklist