-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 132
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
Probes ipc4 get config #5249
base: topic/sof-dev
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Probes ipc4 get config #5249
Conversation
39862fe
to
32b8154
Compare
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.
LGTM, nice addition to make this way easier to use.
The small updates are for fixing sparse warnings from exotic builds. The check fails at first failed file and commit, so there is many iterations. Missing documentation, wrong format string for 32-bit build, etc. etc. |
c5ea419
to
c0b2ba6
Compare
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.
@jsarha, you are flexing again the boundaries of what sof-clients can do ;)
There are couple of places that we need to align with the definition of sof-client, I know it makes things a bit harder, but I want to keep the rules applicable.
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.
Thanks @ujfalusi for feedback! I'll drop the first commit, implement the find widgets wrapper, and add the new sof_probes_ipc_ops callback.
e0c8597
to
ccc2da5
Compare
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.
@jsarha, this version looks much cleaner but there are few things that should be checked.
ccc2da5
to
42620ca
Compare
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.
Thanks again. Hope its now good. At least its converging.
@jsarha, can you check the W=1 build errors? |
42620ca
to
f5bbc39
Compare
Oops, there were other short comings in the previous version too. I'll ping you once the compile CI tests are ready, if they are now OK. |
@ujfalusi , I think this is finally good to go. |
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.
@jsarha, looks good to my eyes, but I will re-check it on Monday with somewhat fresher mind.
Thank you for the updates!
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.
Just one pointer check.
return ret; | ||
} | ||
info = msg.data_ptr; | ||
*num_desc = info->num_elems; |
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.
do we check if this is NULL ?
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.
Which one? num_descs comes from these calls: https://github.com/jsarha/linux-sof/blob/f5bbc39177bbfcd1753a7fef69043f69e3b5a540/sound/soc/sof/sof-client-probes.c#L78 and https://github.com/jsarha/linux-sof/blob/f5bbc39177bbfcd1753a7fef69043f69e3b5a540/sound/soc/sof/sof-client-probes.c#L227 , and info is assigned from msg.data_ptr which is allocated and checked couple of lines earlier (on line 199). There should be no need to add any more checks for either one being NULL, should there?
return ret; | ||
} | ||
info = msg.data_ptr; | ||
*num_desc = info->num_elems; |
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.
Which one? num_descs comes from these calls: https://github.com/jsarha/linux-sof/blob/f5bbc39177bbfcd1753a7fef69043f69e3b5a540/sound/soc/sof/sof-client-probes.c#L78 and https://github.com/jsarha/linux-sof/blob/f5bbc39177bbfcd1753a7fef69043f69e3b5a540/sound/soc/sof/sof-client-probes.c#L227 , and info is assigned from msg.data_ptr which is allocated and checked couple of lines earlier (on line 199). There should be no need to add any more checks for either one being NULL, should there?
info = msg.data_ptr; | ||
*num_desc = info->num_elems; | ||
dev_dbg(dev, "%s: got %zu probe points", __func__, *num_desc); | ||
info = msg.data_ptr; |
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.
Hmm, this superfluous assignment should go.
f5bbc39
to
c3528ea
Compare
Upgrade the struct sof_probes_ipc_ops points_info() method from dummy implementation to a working implementation. The actual functionality requires that the DSP FW supports the IPC request. The support was just recently added. If its not there an IPC failure is reported in the logs. Signed-off-by: Jyri Sarha <[email protected]>
Add SOF_IPC4_MOD_INSTANCE_GET() and SOF_IPC4_MOD_ID_GET() for getting the ids from ipc4 header presentation. Signed-off-by: Jyri Sarha <[email protected]>
Add sof_client_ipc4_find_swidget_by_id() for finding widgets from SOF client devices. The motivation is to decode probes debugfs output to be more readable. Signed-off-by: Jyri Sarha <[email protected]>
The current output of three integers is not very human readable. Use ipc4 functions to describe in more detail what the struct sof_probe_point_desc buffer_id is actually referring to in an ipc4 SOF system. Before this commit the "probe_points" debugfs file could read as: Id: 0x01000004 Purpose: 0 Node id: 0x100 Id: 0x00000006 Purpose: 0 Node id: 0x100 And after in the same situation in an ipc4 system it reads: 16777220,0,256 host-copier.0.playback output buf idx 0 (probed) 6,0,256 gain.1.1 input buf idx 0 (probed) The triplet in the beginning of the line can be used to reinserted the probe point again by writing it into "probe_points" debugfs file, if its first removed by writing the fist number in "probe_points_remove". The last number is ignored when creating a probe point. Signed-off-by: Jyri Sarha <[email protected]>
Add another debugfs file, "probe_points_available", that shows all the available probe points in the SOF FW at the time of query. The probe points are there only when an active SOF stream exists in the system. However, the stream identifiers are persistent in the sense that the same probe point identifiers always appear with the same playback or capture command in the same system configuration. The output, when reading "probe_points_available", may look like this: 16777220,0,256 host-copier.0.playback output 1 buf idx 0 (probed) 6,0,256 gain.1.1 input buf idx 0 (probed) 16777222,0,0 gain.1.1 output buf idx 0 2,0,0 mixin.1.1 input buf idx 0 16777218,0,0 mixin.1.1 output buf idx 0 3,0,0 mixout.2.1 input buf idx 0 16777219,0,0 mixout.2.1 output buf idx 0 65542,0,0 gain.2.1 input 0 buf idx 0 16842758,0,0 gain.2.1 output buf idx 0 15,0,0 smart_amp.2.1 input buf idx 0 16777231,0,0 smart_amp.2.1 output buf idx 0 65540,0,0 dai-copier.SSP.NoCodec-0.playback input buf idx 0 The triplet at the beginning of a line can be copy-pasted as such to "probe_points" debugfs file for adding a probe point. The rest of the line tries to give human readable explanation of what this probe point is. Signed-off-by: Jyri Sarha <[email protected]>
c3528ea
to
4276e4f
Compare
Rebased on top of 6.13 based sof-dev. |
@lgirdwood & @ujfalusi, a gentle ping! |
@@ -34,13 +34,18 @@ struct sof_probe_point_desc { | |||
unsigned int stream_tag; | |||
} __packed; | |||
|
|||
enum sof_probe_info_type { | |||
PROBES_INFO_ACTIVE_PROBES = 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.
i dont think you need the = 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.
just one nit-pick, looks good otherwise
The functionality of the new features depend on thesofproject/sof#9669