* [PATCH] remoteproc: mediatek: fix side effect of mt8195 sram power on
@ 2022-03-09 11:47 Tinghan Shen
2022-03-10 14:40 ` AngeloGioacchino Del Regno
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Tinghan Shen @ 2022-03-09 11:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Bjorn Andersson, Mathieu Poirier, Matthias Brugger
Cc: linux-remoteproc, linux-arm-kernel, linux-mediatek, linux-kernel,
Project_Global_Chrome_Upstream_Group, Tinghan Shen
The definition of L1TCM_SRAM_PDN bits on mt8195 is different to mt8192.
L1TCM_SRAM_PDN bits[3:0] control the power of mt8195 L1TCM SRAM.
L1TCM_SRAM_PDN bits[7:4] control the access path to EMI for SCP.
These bits have to be powered on to allow EMI access for SCP.
Bits[7:4] also affect audio DSP because audio DSP and SCP are
placed on the same hardware bus. If SCP cannot access EMI, audio DSP is
blocked too.
L1TCM_SRAM_PDN bits[31:8] are not used.
This fix removes modification of bits[7:4] when power on/off mt8195 SCP
L1TCM. It's because the modification introduces a short period of time
blocking audio DSP to access EMI. This was not a problem until we have
to load both SCP module and audio DSP module. audio DSP needs to access
EMI because it has source/data on DRAM. Audio DSP will have unexpected
behavior when it accesses EMI and the SCP driver blocks the EMI path at
the same time.
Signed-off-by: Tinghan Shen <tinghan.shen@mediatek.com>
---
drivers/remoteproc/mtk_common.h | 4 +++
drivers/remoteproc/mtk_scp.c | 57 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----
2 files changed, 55 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/mtk_common.h b/drivers/remoteproc/mtk_common.h
index 5ff3867c72f3..27e7172c926d 100644
--- a/drivers/remoteproc/mtk_common.h
+++ b/drivers/remoteproc/mtk_common.h
@@ -51,6 +51,10 @@
#define MT8192_CORE0_WDT_IRQ 0x10030
#define MT8192_CORE0_WDT_CFG 0x10034
+#define MT8195_L1TCM_SRAM_PDN_RESERVED_RSI_BITS 0xF0
+#define MT8195_L1TCM_SRAM_PDN_RESERVED_BITS \
+ MT8195_L1TCM_SRAM_PDN_RESERVED_RSI_BITS
+
#define SCP_FW_VER_LEN 32
#define SCP_SHARE_BUFFER_SIZE 288
diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/mtk_scp.c b/drivers/remoteproc/mtk_scp.c
index dcddb33e9997..4d75af856fd1 100644
--- a/drivers/remoteproc/mtk_scp.c
+++ b/drivers/remoteproc/mtk_scp.c
@@ -365,22 +365,32 @@ static int mt8183_scp_before_load(struct mtk_scp *scp)
return 0;
}
-static void mt8192_power_on_sram(void __iomem *addr)
+static void scp_sram_power_on(void __iomem *addr, u32 reserved_mask)
{
int i;
for (i = 31; i >= 0; i--)
- writel(GENMASK(i, 0), addr);
+ writel(GENMASK(i, 0) & ~reserved_mask, addr);
writel(0, addr);
}
-static void mt8192_power_off_sram(void __iomem *addr)
+static void scp_sram_power_off(void __iomem *addr, u32 reserved_mask)
{
int i;
writel(0, addr);
for (i = 0; i < 32; i++)
- writel(GENMASK(i, 0), addr);
+ writel(GENMASK(i, 0) & ~reserved_mask, addr);
+}
+
+static void mt8192_power_on_sram(void __iomem *addr)
+{
+ scp_sram_power_on(addr, 0);
+}
+
+static void mt8192_power_off_sram(void __iomem *addr)
+{
+ scp_sram_power_off(addr, 0);
}
static int mt8192_scp_before_load(struct mtk_scp *scp)
@@ -403,6 +413,27 @@ static int mt8192_scp_before_load(struct mtk_scp *scp)
return 0;
}
+static int mt8195_scp_before_load(struct mtk_scp *scp)
+{
+ /* clear SPM interrupt, SCP2SPM_IPC_CLR */
+ writel(0xff, scp->reg_base + MT8192_SCP2SPM_IPC_CLR);
+
+ writel(1, scp->reg_base + MT8192_CORE0_SW_RSTN_SET);
+
+ /* enable SRAM clock */
+ mt8192_power_on_sram(scp->reg_base + MT8192_L2TCM_SRAM_PD_0);
+ mt8192_power_on_sram(scp->reg_base + MT8192_L2TCM_SRAM_PD_1);
+ mt8192_power_on_sram(scp->reg_base + MT8192_L2TCM_SRAM_PD_2);
+ scp_sram_power_on(scp->reg_base + MT8192_L1TCM_SRAM_PDN,
+ MT8195_L1TCM_SRAM_PDN_RESERVED_BITS);
+ mt8192_power_on_sram(scp->reg_base + MT8192_CPU0_SRAM_PD);
+
+ /* enable MPU for all memory regions */
+ writel(0xff, scp->reg_base + MT8192_CORE0_MEM_ATT_PREDEF);
+
+ return 0;
+}
+
static int scp_load(struct rproc *rproc, const struct firmware *fw)
{
struct mtk_scp *scp = rproc->priv;
@@ -561,6 +592,20 @@ static void mt8192_scp_stop(struct mtk_scp *scp)
writel(0, scp->reg_base + MT8192_CORE0_WDT_CFG);
}
+static void mt8195_scp_stop(struct mtk_scp *scp)
+{
+ /* Disable SRAM clock */
+ mt8192_power_off_sram(scp->reg_base + MT8192_L2TCM_SRAM_PD_0);
+ mt8192_power_off_sram(scp->reg_base + MT8192_L2TCM_SRAM_PD_1);
+ mt8192_power_off_sram(scp->reg_base + MT8192_L2TCM_SRAM_PD_2);
+ scp_sram_power_off(scp->reg_base + MT8192_L1TCM_SRAM_PDN,
+ MT8195_L1TCM_SRAM_PDN_RESERVED_BITS);
+ mt8192_power_off_sram(scp->reg_base + MT8192_CPU0_SRAM_PD);
+
+ /* Disable SCP watchdog */
+ writel(0, scp->reg_base + MT8192_CORE0_WDT_CFG);
+}
+
static int scp_stop(struct rproc *rproc)
{
struct mtk_scp *scp = (struct mtk_scp *)rproc->priv;
@@ -888,11 +933,11 @@ static const struct mtk_scp_of_data mt8192_of_data = {
static const struct mtk_scp_of_data mt8195_of_data = {
.scp_clk_get = mt8195_scp_clk_get,
- .scp_before_load = mt8192_scp_before_load,
+ .scp_before_load = mt8195_scp_before_load,
.scp_irq_handler = mt8192_scp_irq_handler,
.scp_reset_assert = mt8192_scp_reset_assert,
.scp_reset_deassert = mt8192_scp_reset_deassert,
- .scp_stop = mt8192_scp_stop,
+ .scp_stop = mt8195_scp_stop,
.scp_da_to_va = mt8192_scp_da_to_va,
.host_to_scp_reg = MT8192_GIPC_IN_SET,
.host_to_scp_int_bit = MT8192_HOST_IPC_INT_BIT,
--
2.18.0
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] remoteproc: mediatek: fix side effect of mt8195 sram power on
2022-03-09 11:47 [PATCH] remoteproc: mediatek: fix side effect of mt8195 sram power on Tinghan Shen
@ 2022-03-10 14:40 ` AngeloGioacchino Del Regno
2022-03-11 12:21 ` Tinghan Shen
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno @ 2022-03-10 14:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Tinghan Shen, Bjorn Andersson, Mathieu Poirier, Matthias Brugger
Cc: linux-remoteproc, linux-arm-kernel, linux-mediatek, linux-kernel,
Project_Global_Chrome_Upstream_Group
Il 09/03/22 12:47, Tinghan Shen ha scritto:
> The definition of L1TCM_SRAM_PDN bits on mt8195 is different to mt8192.
>
> L1TCM_SRAM_PDN bits[3:0] control the power of mt8195 L1TCM SRAM.
>
> L1TCM_SRAM_PDN bits[7:4] control the access path to EMI for SCP.
> These bits have to be powered on to allow EMI access for SCP.
>
> Bits[7:4] also affect audio DSP because audio DSP and SCP are
> placed on the same hardware bus. If SCP cannot access EMI, audio DSP is
> blocked too.
>
> L1TCM_SRAM_PDN bits[31:8] are not used.
>
> This fix removes modification of bits[7:4] when power on/off mt8195 SCP
> L1TCM. It's because the modification introduces a short period of time
> blocking audio DSP to access EMI. This was not a problem until we have
> to load both SCP module and audio DSP module. audio DSP needs to access
> EMI because it has source/data on DRAM. Audio DSP will have unexpected
> behavior when it accesses EMI and the SCP driver blocks the EMI path at
> the same time.
>
> Signed-off-by: Tinghan Shen <tinghan.shen@mediatek.com>
> ---
> drivers/remoteproc/mtk_common.h | 4 +++
> drivers/remoteproc/mtk_scp.c | 57 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----
> 2 files changed, 55 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/mtk_common.h b/drivers/remoteproc/mtk_common.h
> index 5ff3867c72f3..27e7172c926d 100644
> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/mtk_common.h
> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/mtk_common.h
> @@ -51,6 +51,10 @@
> #define MT8192_CORE0_WDT_IRQ 0x10030
> #define MT8192_CORE0_WDT_CFG 0x10034
>
> +#define MT8195_L1TCM_SRAM_PDN_RESERVED_RSI_BITS 0xF0
This is GENMASK(7, 4)..
> +#define MT8195_L1TCM_SRAM_PDN_RESERVED_BITS \
> + MT8195_L1TCM_SRAM_PDN_RESERVED_RSI_BITS
> +
Why are you defining the same thing twice?
Please drop this.
> #define SCP_FW_VER_LEN 32
> #define SCP_SHARE_BUFFER_SIZE 288
>
> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/mtk_scp.c b/drivers/remoteproc/mtk_scp.c
> index dcddb33e9997..4d75af856fd1 100644
> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/mtk_scp.c
> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/mtk_scp.c
> @@ -365,22 +365,32 @@ static int mt8183_scp_before_load(struct mtk_scp *scp)
> return 0;
> }
>
> -static void mt8192_power_on_sram(void __iomem *addr)
> +static void scp_sram_power_on(void __iomem *addr, u32 reserved_mask)
> {
> int i;
>
> for (i = 31; i >= 0; i--)
> - writel(GENMASK(i, 0), addr);
> + writel(GENMASK(i, 0) & ~reserved_mask, addr);
> writel(0, addr);
> }
>
> -static void mt8192_power_off_sram(void __iomem *addr)
> +static void scp_sram_power_off(void __iomem *addr, u32 reserved_mask)
> {
> int i;
>
> writel(0, addr);
> for (i = 0; i < 32; i++)
> - writel(GENMASK(i, 0), addr);
> + writel(GENMASK(i, 0) & ~reserved_mask, addr);
> +}
> +
> +static void mt8192_power_on_sram(void __iomem *addr)
> +{
> + scp_sram_power_on(addr, 0);
> +}
> +
> +static void mt8192_power_off_sram(void __iomem *addr)
> +{
> + scp_sram_power_off(addr, 0);
> }
>
> static int mt8192_scp_before_load(struct mtk_scp *scp)
> @@ -403,6 +413,27 @@ static int mt8192_scp_before_load(struct mtk_scp *scp)
> return 0;
> }
>
> +static int mt8195_scp_before_load(struct mtk_scp *scp)
> +{
> + /* clear SPM interrupt, SCP2SPM_IPC_CLR */
> + writel(0xff, scp->reg_base + MT8192_SCP2SPM_IPC_CLR);
> +
> + writel(1, scp->reg_base + MT8192_CORE0_SW_RSTN_SET);
> +
> + /* enable SRAM clock */
> + mt8192_power_on_sram(scp->reg_base + MT8192_L2TCM_SRAM_PD_0);
At this point, you can simply use scp_sram_power_{on, off} instead of defining
a new function for just one call... I get that your intent here is to enhance
human readability, but I don't think that this is really happening with that and,
if it is, it's just about a little ignorable difference.
Please use scp_sram_power_on() and scp_sram_power_off() directly.
scp_sram_power_on(scp->reg_base + MT8192_L2TCM_SRAM_PD_1, 0);
... etc :)
> + mt8192_power_on_sram(scp->reg_base + MT8192_L2TCM_SRAM_PD_1);
> + mt8192_power_on_sram(scp->reg_base + MT8192_L2TCM_SRAM_PD_2);
> + scp_sram_power_on(scp->reg_base + MT8192_L1TCM_SRAM_PDN,
> + MT8195_L1TCM_SRAM_PDN_RESERVED_BITS);
> + mt8192_power_on_sram(scp->reg_base + MT8192_CPU0_SRAM_PD);
> +
> + /* enable MPU for all memory regions */
> + writel(0xff, scp->reg_base + MT8192_CORE0_MEM_ATT_PREDEF);
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
Please remember to add me to the Cc's for the next version, so that I will be
able to timely give you my R-b tag for this one.
Regards,
Angelo
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] remoteproc: mediatek: fix side effect of mt8195 sram power on
2022-03-10 14:40 ` AngeloGioacchino Del Regno
@ 2022-03-11 12:21 ` Tinghan Shen
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Tinghan Shen @ 2022-03-11 12:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno, Bjorn Andersson, Mathieu Poirier,
Matthias Brugger
Cc: linux-remoteproc, linux-arm-kernel, linux-mediatek, linux-kernel,
Project_Global_Chrome_Upstream_Group
Hi Angelo,
I'll update your suggestions at next version.
Thank you.
Best regards,
Tinghan
On Thu, 2022-03-10 at 15:40 +0100, AngeloGioacchino Del Regno wrote:
> Il 09/03/22 12:47, Tinghan Shen ha scritto:
> > The definition of L1TCM_SRAM_PDN bits on mt8195 is different to mt8192.
> >
> > L1TCM_SRAM_PDN bits[3:0] control the power of mt8195 L1TCM SRAM.
> >
> > L1TCM_SRAM_PDN bits[7:4] control the access path to EMI for SCP.
> > These bits have to be powered on to allow EMI access for SCP.
> >
> > Bits[7:4] also affect audio DSP because audio DSP and SCP are
> > placed on the same hardware bus. If SCP cannot access EMI, audio DSP is
> > blocked too.
> >
> > L1TCM_SRAM_PDN bits[31:8] are not used.
> >
> > This fix removes modification of bits[7:4] when power on/off mt8195 SCP
> > L1TCM. It's because the modification introduces a short period of time
> > blocking audio DSP to access EMI. This was not a problem until we have
> > to load both SCP module and audio DSP module. audio DSP needs to access
> > EMI because it has source/data on DRAM. Audio DSP will have unexpected
> > behavior when it accesses EMI and the SCP driver blocks the EMI path at
> > the same time.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Tinghan Shen <tinghan.shen@mediatek.com>
> > ---
> > drivers/remoteproc/mtk_common.h | 4 +++
> > drivers/remoteproc/mtk_scp.c | 57 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----
> > 2 files changed, 55 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/mtk_common.h b/drivers/remoteproc/mtk_common.h
> > index 5ff3867c72f3..27e7172c926d 100644
> > --- a/drivers/remoteproc/mtk_common.h
> > +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/mtk_common.h
> > @@ -51,6 +51,10 @@
> > #define MT8192_CORE0_WDT_IRQ 0x10030
> > #define MT8192_CORE0_WDT_CFG 0x10034
> >
> > +#define MT8195_L1TCM_SRAM_PDN_RESERVED_RSI_BITS 0xF0
>
> This is GENMASK(7, 4)..
>
> > +#define MT8195_L1TCM_SRAM_PDN_RESERVED_BITS \
> > + MT8195_L1TCM_SRAM_PDN_RESERVED_RSI_BITS
> > +
>
> Why are you defining the same thing twice?
> Please drop this.
>
> > #define SCP_FW_VER_LEN 32
> > #define SCP_SHARE_BUFFER_SIZE 288
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/mtk_scp.c b/drivers/remoteproc/mtk_scp.c
> > index dcddb33e9997..4d75af856fd1 100644
> > --- a/drivers/remoteproc/mtk_scp.c
> > +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/mtk_scp.c
> > @@ -365,22 +365,32 @@ static int mt8183_scp_before_load(struct mtk_scp *scp)
> > return 0;
> > }
> >
> > -static void mt8192_power_on_sram(void __iomem *addr)
> > +static void scp_sram_power_on(void __iomem *addr, u32 reserved_mask)
> > {
> > int i;
> >
> > for (i = 31; i >= 0; i--)
> > - writel(GENMASK(i, 0), addr);
> > + writel(GENMASK(i, 0) & ~reserved_mask, addr);
> > writel(0, addr);
> > }
> >
> > -static void mt8192_power_off_sram(void __iomem *addr)
> > +static void scp_sram_power_off(void __iomem *addr, u32 reserved_mask)
> > {
> > int i;
> >
> > writel(0, addr);
> > for (i = 0; i < 32; i++)
> > - writel(GENMASK(i, 0), addr);
> > + writel(GENMASK(i, 0) & ~reserved_mask, addr);
> > +}
> > +
> > +static void mt8192_power_on_sram(void __iomem *addr)
> > +{
> > + scp_sram_power_on(addr, 0);
> > +}
> > +
> > +static void mt8192_power_off_sram(void __iomem *addr)
> > +{
> > + scp_sram_power_off(addr, 0);
> > }
> >
> > static int mt8192_scp_before_load(struct mtk_scp *scp)
> > @@ -403,6 +413,27 @@ static int mt8192_scp_before_load(struct mtk_scp *scp)
> > return 0;
> > }
> >
> > +static int mt8195_scp_before_load(struct mtk_scp *scp)
> > +{
> > + /* clear SPM interrupt, SCP2SPM_IPC_CLR */
> > + writel(0xff, scp->reg_base + MT8192_SCP2SPM_IPC_CLR);
> > +
> > + writel(1, scp->reg_base + MT8192_CORE0_SW_RSTN_SET);
> > +
> > + /* enable SRAM clock */
> > + mt8192_power_on_sram(scp->reg_base + MT8192_L2TCM_SRAM_PD_0);
>
> At this point, you can simply use scp_sram_power_{on, off} instead of defining
> a new function for just one call... I get that your intent here is to enhance
> human readability, but I don't think that this is really happening with that and,
> if it is, it's just about a little ignorable difference.
>
> Please use scp_sram_power_on() and scp_sram_power_off() directly.
>
> scp_sram_power_on(scp->reg_base + MT8192_L2TCM_SRAM_PD_1, 0);
> ... etc :)
>
> > + mt8192_power_on_sram(scp->reg_base + MT8192_L2TCM_SRAM_PD_1);
> > + mt8192_power_on_sram(scp->reg_base + MT8192_L2TCM_SRAM_PD_2);
> > + scp_sram_power_on(scp->reg_base + MT8192_L1TCM_SRAM_PDN,
> > + MT8195_L1TCM_SRAM_PDN_RESERVED_BITS);
> > + mt8192_power_on_sram(scp->reg_base + MT8192_CPU0_SRAM_PD);
> > +
> > + /* enable MPU for all memory regions */
> > + writel(0xff, scp->reg_base + MT8192_CORE0_MEM_ATT_PREDEF);
> > +
> > + return 0;
> > +}
> > +
>
> Please remember to add me to the Cc's for the next version, so that I will be
> able to timely give you my R-b tag for this one.
>
> Regards,
> Angelo
>
>
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2022-03-11 12:32 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2022-03-09 11:47 [PATCH] remoteproc: mediatek: fix side effect of mt8195 sram power on Tinghan Shen
2022-03-10 14:40 ` AngeloGioacchino Del Regno
2022-03-11 12:21 ` Tinghan Shen
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).