From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B2BFC4338F for ; Wed, 28 Jul 2021 18:49:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF6C86056C for ; Wed, 28 Jul 2021 18:49:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S230083AbhG1Stj (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 Jul 2021 14:49:39 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:43412 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229874AbhG1Sti (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 Jul 2021 14:49:38 -0400 Received: from mail-oi1-x233.google.com (mail-oi1-x233.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::233]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D2573C0613C1 for ; Wed, 28 Jul 2021 11:49:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-oi1-x233.google.com with SMTP id u10so4958980oiw.4 for ; Wed, 28 Jul 2021 11:49:36 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linaro.org; s=google; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=U7vNPIko5GOjWbPYkaIByKIDTKv6SGLaM0HuUzXJ7Do=; b=IWX2ITiBL6y1vEe0ozMojPakXQ01o2k+aYejjRl4zE0021Ay7iEGsZUh31vLZY0Jym AOJRN8JGcT1MKHxDPwcHpbt69C31nkw+qyFcB+Z3sRSXX0v2z4vXlfzL46ZzUPi53rb5 iwIgFzidujHad32g5L9CypUC0bjt30ch/DQ6wUzuS451o+Wn/dX7E+oxoZ3msZfSAKhE MDeboJH25jqc2RnIMB687Kfh2Rj8OgA+jYJHJdnBy6aaPqJw/cV4wYWBi5cc2rBgRcMH VRSko1PV8GqQxa5l63HsgWd8hYjb40bHmCKsNjENNfVoFjzpGU5RiPScAxLzYAIKLzg0 NZ7g== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=U7vNPIko5GOjWbPYkaIByKIDTKv6SGLaM0HuUzXJ7Do=; b=BoaKcVzZvsfHhWYTOaMToHMp6Hrhoq4gbDg3CCD8iSIp4rBt28hJrD+drwH0kVMcWp /+HuiP5c75wRiDly5bmMsHiGTr1fL+sMHnFqFfqi92B6aAYLhCuYEWTw5xtd0O1e3u0Y lOSUbV/Bv2qS6hRHc+1zJUP9964rAwznsctx4gz4vLa8c68sM/7I6FE/IT4uvkRmTKN0 E6ctxexjrcbgpkyL+12PhMFDRkjtq90xeSbnF/1JfCLlQhSRymMtFKY79DVEmH3ceZUR 0f93uZgvLS4rjwgEvHLQdUDyWdtxIEh81amrkA/xPX8JqbCuNRtVdnugTfSkxo97qO+n 7vuA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530k5gdOGPV6PKBxujAlFOwOh2d1bQfD5vgsSxP13M7iSKGpjy5U lGR3djkMIYKDjvU3VQIGVIFvcw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwxcGRr32B2c1xZaRJ3khgROrE350We7kDTSR0NZxjlPl6eo+gEwRdkmWxv3Tw1zkx794iADg== X-Received: by 2002:aca:5f8b:: with SMTP id t133mr7259687oib.15.1627498176010; Wed, 28 Jul 2021 11:49:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ripper (104-57-184-186.lightspeed.austtx.sbcglobal.net. [104.57.184.186]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id b6sm149201oib.51.2021.07.28.11.49.35 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 28 Jul 2021 11:49:35 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2021 11:47:45 -0700 From: Bjorn Andersson To: Dmitry Baryshkov Cc: Rajendra Nayak , Stephen Boyd , ulf.hansson@linaro.org, viresh.kumar@linaro.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, rojay@codeaurora.org, stephan@gerhold.net Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] arm64: dts: sc7180: Add required-opps for i2c Message-ID: References: <12711a61-e16c-d2bc-6e04-ab94c7551abe@codeaurora.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org On Wed 28 Jul 07:01 PDT 2021, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: > On 28/07/2021 06:46, Bjorn Andersson wrote: > > On Tue 27 Jul 02:35 CDT 2021, Rajendra Nayak wrote: > > > > > > > > On 7/25/2021 10:31 PM, Bjorn Andersson wrote: > > > > On Mon 19 Jul 23:29 CDT 2021, Rajendra Nayak wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 7/20/2021 12:49 AM, Bjorn Andersson wrote: > > > > > > On Mon 19 Jul 04:37 CDT 2021, Rajendra Nayak wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 7/17/2021 3:29 AM, Bjorn Andersson wrote: > > > > > > > > On Fri 16 Jul 16:49 CDT 2021, Stephen Boyd wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quoting Bjorn Andersson (2021-07-16 13:52:12) > > > > > > > > > > On Fri 16 Jul 15:21 CDT 2021, Stephen Boyd wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quoting Bjorn Andersson (2021-07-16 13:18:56) > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri 16 Jul 05:00 CDT 2021, Rajendra Nayak wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > qup-i2c devices on sc7180 are clocked with a fixed clock (19.2 MHz) > > > > > > > > > > > > > Though qup-i2c does not support DVFS, it still needs to vote for a > > > > > > > > > > > > > performance state on 'CX' to satisfy the 19.2 Mhz clock frequency > > > > > > > > > > > > > requirement. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sounds good, but... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Use 'required-opps' to pass this information from > > > > > > > > > > > > > device tree, and also add the power-domains property to specify > > > > > > > > > > > > > the CX power-domain. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ..is the required-opps really needed with my rpmhpd patch in place? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes? Because rpmhpd_opp_low_svs is not the lowest performance state for > > > > > > > > > > > CX. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On e.g. sm8250 the first available non-zero corner presented in cmd-db > > > > > > > > > > is low_svs. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > what rail is this? the mmcx? Perhaps it does not support RET. > > > > > > > cx usually supports both collapse state and RET. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > That was the one I was specifically looking at for the MDSS_GDSC->MMCX > > > > > > issue, so it's likely I didn't look elsewhere. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Indeed. On sc7180 it's not the first non-zero corner. I suppose > > > > > > > > > retention for CX isn't actually used when the SoC is awake so your > > > > > > > > > rpmhpd patch is putting in a vote for something that doesn't do anything > > > > > > > > > at runtime for CX? I imagine that rpmh only sets the aggregate corner to > > > > > > > > > retention when the whole SoC is suspended/sleeping, otherwise things > > > > > > > > > wouldn't go very well. Similarly, min_svs may be VDD minimization? If > > > > > > > > > so, those first two states are basically states that shouldn't be used > > > > > > > > > at runtime, almost like sleep states. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But if that's the case, I don't think it's appropriate for the "enabled > > > > > > > > state" of the domain to use any of those corners. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I rechecked the downstream kernels where all this voting happens from within > > > > > > > the clock drivers, and I do see votes to min_svs for some clocks, but Stephen is > > > > > > > right that RET is not something that's voted on while in active state. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But always going with something just above the ret level while active will also > > > > > > > not work for all devices, for instance for i2c on 7180, it needs a cx vote of > > > > > > > low svs while the rail (cx) does support something lower than that which is min svs. > > > > > > > (why can't it just work with min svs?, I don't know, these values and recommendations > > > > > > > come in from the voltage plans published by HW teams for every SoC and we just end up > > > > > > > using them in SW, perhaps something to dig further and understand which I will try and > > > > > > > do but these are the values in voltage plans and downstream kernels which work for now) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So to some degree this invalidates my argumentation about the > > > > > > enabled_corner in rpmhpd, given that "enabled" means a different corner > > > > > > for each rail - not just the one with lowest non-zero value. > > > > > > > > > > Right, it might work in some cases but might not work for all. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Which makes it way less desirable. > > > > > > > > The enable state for rpmhpd power domains doesn't meet my expectations > > > > for how a power domain should behave, > > > > > > Right and that's perhaps because these are not the usual power-domains, > > > which have one "on/active" state and one or more "off/inactive" states (off/ret/clock-stop) > > > Rpmhpd has multiple "on/active" states, and whats "on/active" for one consumer > > > might not be "on/active" for another, so this information is hard to be managed > > > at a generic level and these requests in some way or the other need to come > > > in explicitly from the resp. consumers. > > > > > > > I think it's fine if we just acknowledge that this is how the rpmhpd > > domains works. > > > > But I am worried about how we're going to handle the case where the > > consumer is indirectly referencing one of these power-domains using a > > subdomain (gdsc). > > With the proper subdomain relationship in place and with Ulf's patches, this > seems to be handled correctly. gdsc sets proper level for the parent power > domain, which gets voted and unvoted by the core pm code when gdsc's power > domain is powered on or off. > Right, but this works only in our case because "on" for MMCX happens to be the first non-zero corner. What this patch points out is that for some of the other power domains my patch in the rpmhpd driver isn't sufficient - and presumably wouldn't work for other gdsc's (that are parented by CX or MX). Regards, Bjorn > > And the open question is if a solution to that problem will solve this > > problem as well, or if we need to have this and some mechanism to > > describe the "on state" for the parent of a subdomain. > > > -- > With best wishes > Dmitry