From: Lucas Stach <l.stach@pengutronix.de>
To: Russell King - ARM Linux admin <linux@armlinux.org.uk>,
Michael Olbrich <m.olbrich@pengutronix.de>
Cc: Vinod Koul <vinod.koul@intel.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, dmaengine@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [BUG] imx-sdma: readl_relaxed_poll_timeout_atomic() conversion
Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2019 14:14:10 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1561378450.2587.3.camel@pengutronix.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190622184237.ld7xwc5kk7sbghae@shell.armlinux.org.uk>
Hi Russell,
Am Samstag, den 22.06.2019, 19:42 +0100 schrieb Russell King - ARM Linux admin:
> On Sat, Jun 22, 2019 at 08:10:29PM +0200, Michael Olbrich wrote:
> > On Sat, Jun 22, 2019 at 05:53:18PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux admin wrote:
> > > Old code:
> > >
> > > - while (!(ret = readl_relaxed(sdma->regs + SDMA_H_INTR) & 1)) {
> > > - if (timeout-- <= 0)
> > > - break;
> > > - udelay(1);
> > > - }
> > >
> > > So, while bit 0 is _clear_ the loop continues to poll.
> > >
> > >
> > > New code:
> > >
> > > + ret = readl_relaxed_poll_timeout_atomic(sdma->regs + SDMA_H_STATSTOP,
> > > + reg, !(reg & 1), 1, 500);
> > >
> > > Doesn't really tell us what the termination condition is (because of
> > > the obfuscation taking away the details), but if we dig into the
> > > macro maze:
> > >
> > > #define readl_relaxed_poll_timeout_atomic(addr, val, cond, delay_us, timeout_us) \
> > > readx_poll_timeout_atomic(readl_relaxed, addr, val, cond, delay_us, timeout_us)
> > >
> > > #define readx_poll_timeout_atomic(op, addr, val, cond, delay_us, timeout_us) \
> > > ({ \
> > > u64 __timeout_us = (timeout_us); \
> > > unsigned long __delay_us = (delay_us); \
> > > ktime_t __timeout = ktime_add_us(ktime_get(), __timeout_us); \
> > > for (;;) { \
> > > (val) = op(addr); \
> > > if (cond) \
> > > break; \
> > >
> > > "cond" is passed in to here unmodified, so this becomes:
> > >
> > > for (;;) {
> > > > > > reg = readl_relaxed(sdma->regs + SDMA_H_STATSTOP);
> > > > > > if (!(reg & 1))
> > > > > > break;
> > >
> > > So, if bit 0 of this register is clear, we terminate the loop.
> > >
> > > Seems to me like this is a great illustration why using a helper
> > > _introduces_ bugs, because it hides the detail about what the exit
> > > condition for the embedded loop actually is, and leads to this kind
> > > of error.
> > >
> > > In any case, the conversion is obviously incorrect.
> > >
> > > I occasionally see the "Timeout waiting for CH0 ready" error during
> > > boot on a cbi4, which, given the above, means that we did end up
> > > seeing bit 1 set (so according to the old code, we waited
> > > successfully.)
> >
> > The old code was polling SDMA_H_INTR so it waited for the bit to be set.
> > The new code (as documented in the commit message) polls SDMA_H_STATSTOP
> > instead.
> > I believe this register is called SDMAARM_STOP_STAT in the reference
> > manual. And the documentation states: "Reading this register yields the
> > current state of the HE[i] bits".
> > And from the documentation of the SDMA "DONE" instruction:
> > "Clear HE bit for the current channel, send an interrupt to the Arm
> > platform for the current channel and reschedule."
> >
> > My interpretation of this is, that waiting for the bit in SDMA_H_STATSTOP
> > to become zero has the same effect as waiting for the bit in SDMA_H_INTR to
> > be set. Or am I missing something?
>
> So, why do all my iMX6 platforms now randomly spit out:
>
> "imx-sdma 20ec000.sdma: Timeout waiting for CH0 ready"
This is due to a DT misconfiguration which was uncovered with a recent
driver change (25aaa75df1e6 dmaengine: imx-sdma: add clock ratio 1:1
check) and fixed with (941acd566b18 dmaengine: imx-sdma: Only check
ratio on parts that support 1:1). Please switch to a recent stable
kernel, 5.1.5 has the fix included.
Regards,
Lucas
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-06-24 12:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-06-22 16:53 [BUG] imx-sdma: readl_relaxed_poll_timeout_atomic() conversion Russell King - ARM Linux admin
2019-06-22 18:02 ` [PATCH] dmaengine: imx-sdma: fix incorrect conversion to readl_relaxed_poll_timeout_atomic() Russell King
2019-06-22 18:10 ` [BUG] imx-sdma: readl_relaxed_poll_timeout_atomic() conversion Michael Olbrich
2019-06-22 18:42 ` Russell King - ARM Linux admin
2019-06-22 18:51 ` Russell King - ARM Linux admin
2019-06-24 12:14 ` Lucas Stach [this message]
2019-06-24 12:15 ` Russell King - ARM Linux admin
2019-06-24 12:52 ` Lucas Stach
2019-06-22 18:55 ` [PATCH v2] dmaengine: imx-sdma: fix incorrect conversion to readl_relaxed_poll_timeout_atomic() Russell King
2019-06-22 19:26 ` Russell King - ARM Linux admin
2019-06-22 20:26 ` Russell King - ARM Linux admin
2019-06-23 13:29 ` Fabio Estevam
2019-06-25 9:00 ` Robin Gong
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1561378450.2587.3.camel@pengutronix.de \
--to=l.stach@pengutronix.de \
--cc=dmaengine@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux@armlinux.org.uk \
--cc=m.olbrich@pengutronix.de \
--cc=vinod.koul@intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).