Skip to content

Conversation

@ktrzcinx
Copy link
Member

@ktrzcinx ktrzcinx commented Aug 20, 2020

It's a FW part extracted from #2965. This part have ABI changes.

Kernel part: thesofproject/linux#2377

@ktrzcinx ktrzcinx added the ABI ABI change involved label Aug 20, 2020
@ktrzcinx ktrzcinx requested review from a team, akloniex, bardliao and xiulipan as code owners August 20, 2020 08:19
Copy link
Member

@lgirdwood lgirdwood left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Almost good to go.

@lgirdwood lgirdwood added this to the ABI-3.17 milestone Aug 20, 2020
@lgirdwood
Copy link
Member

@ktrzcinx can you link kernel PR here too.

@ktrzcinx ktrzcinx force-pushed the logger-trace-handler branch from 80ae6de to 56c28bb Compare August 21, 2020 07:47
@lgirdwood
Copy link
Member

@ktrzcinx do we have a pending kernel PR or logger PR ?

@ktrzcinx
Copy link
Member Author

ktrzcinx commented Aug 21, 2020

@ktrzcinx do we have a pending kernel PR or logger PR ?

I'm currently updating changes to kernel code before making kernel PR, logger PR is #2965 (I need there to apply your suggestions, after sending kernel PR)

Copy link
Member

@lgirdwood lgirdwood left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Kernel now merged, just waiting on CI.... EDIT. logger merged not kernel.

@lgirdwood
Copy link
Member

@ktrzcinx can you ping me when kernel part is good and we can merge this one.

@ktrzcinx
Copy link
Member Author

ktrzcinx commented Sep 1, 2020

@lgirdwood, of course, I will do that

Copy link
Collaborator

@kv2019i kv2019i left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

With IPC ABI hat on, some minor concerns raised in kernel side review, let's keep open until those are solved: -> thesofproject/linux#2377 (comment)

@lgirdwood lgirdwood modified the milestones: ABI-3.17, ABI-3.18 Sep 15, 2020
@plbossart
Copy link
Member

@ktrzcinx can you update the firmware part to reflect the changes made on the kernel side. I think it's quite good now, and it'd be a nice addition to firmware 1.6 and kernel 5.10.

@ktrzcinx ktrzcinx force-pushed the logger-trace-handler branch from cd9f110 to ec4b077 Compare September 17, 2020 05:07
@ktrzcinx
Copy link
Member Author

@plbossart Aligned with kernel code.

@ktrzcinx ktrzcinx force-pushed the logger-trace-handler branch from ec4b077 to 107d3a5 Compare September 17, 2020 05:33
Copy link
Collaborator

@kv2019i kv2019i left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

ABI is now ok for kernel side as well. We are continuing with some codestyle issues for the kernel PR, but ABI part is good.

@lgirdwood As this missed the 1.6 release branch, should this bump ABI to 3.18? If yes, @ktrzcinx could you update the PR with annotations following the recently merged thesofproject/sof-docs#283 .. ?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@ktrzcinx can you confirm this is a debug ABI update only. If so, we can put in in ABI3.17.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This change bumps both ABI numbers

@ktrzcinx ktrzcinx force-pushed the logger-trace-handler branch from 107d3a5 to 9146936 Compare September 17, 2020 12:42
@ktrzcinx
Copy link
Member Author

@lgirdwood As this missed the 1.6 release branch, should this bump ABI to 3.18? If yes, @ktrzcinx could you update the PR with annotations following the recently merged thesofproject/sof-docs#283 .. ?

ABI bumped, added ABI version information for new structures .

@lgirdwood
Copy link
Member

@ktrzcinx thank you, btw I've cleaned up the ABI MINOR PRs and I think we are good for this is 3.17 (which we can also close for v1.6). Sorry to ask you to change the ABI back to 3.17 but I think we can get in in v1.6. @kv2019i do you agree ?

Message received from host carry information about new log level for
component with pass selected filter values. Filter values are passed
as a set of key-value values, what make it easy to extend in future.
Last element in set must have SOF_IPC_TRACE_FILTER_ELEM_FIN bit set
in key field, to mark end of filter values.
New log level is also obligatory, must be within LOG_LEVEL_CRITICAL
to LOG_LEVEL_VERBOSE range.
It allows to changing trace lelvel for each components in firmware,
on particular pipeline or with particular uuid key with single ipc
command.
Updating trace level is not fully implemented yet.

Signed-off-by: Karol Trzcinski <karolx.trzcinski@linux.intel.com>
@ktrzcinx ktrzcinx force-pushed the logger-trace-handler branch from 9146936 to ed08acd Compare September 17, 2020 16:01
@ktrzcinx
Copy link
Member Author

ktrzcinx commented Sep 17, 2020

Updated comments to ABI 3.17

@ktrzcinx ktrzcinx force-pushed the logger-trace-handler branch from ed08acd to d7eb665 Compare September 17, 2020 19:53
Update process must be splited into two parts - updating global
components, which have trace contect saved in dedicated section
and updating ipc components, where trace contect is part of
particular instance and data.

Signed-off-by: Karol Trzcinski <karolx.trzcinski@linux.intel.com>
@ktrzcinx ktrzcinx force-pushed the logger-trace-handler branch from d7eb665 to e4b5921 Compare September 17, 2020 21:52
@lgirdwood
Copy link
Member

@kv2019i ping any comment here to keep thi sin ABI 3.17 for v1.6 ?

@kv2019i
Copy link
Collaborator

kv2019i commented Sep 18, 2020

@lgirdwood wrote:

@kv2019i ping any comment here to keep thi sin ABI 3.17 for v1.6 ?
Aa, you missed my thumbs-up reaction to #3329 (comment) . But yes, go ahead with 3.17 and v1.6!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

ABI ABI change involved

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants