Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] ARM: exynos: clear L310_AUX_CTRL_NS_LOCKDOWN in default l2c_aux_val

From: Guillaume Tucker <guillaume.tucker@collabora.com>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>,
	Russell King <linux@armlinux.org.uk>
Cc: Kukjin Kim <kgene@kernel.org>, Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
	kernel@collabora.com, devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	"linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org" 
	<linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] ARM: exynos: clear L310_AUX_CTRL_NS_LOCKDOWN in default l2c_aux_val
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 2020 15:42:28 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <fd1a34c4-dcc1-1480-1e96-8bd94ada9846@collabora.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAJKOXPfT7LvHVpTdaQ1voVi=OtC4aV6hbyzcekmrPMkb+5ebNg@mail.gmail.com>

On 01/09/2020 14:51, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On Tue, 1 Sep 2020 at 15:45, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org> wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, 1 Sep 2020 at 15:34, Guillaume Tucker
>> <guillaume.tucker@collabora.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Krzysztof, Russell,
>>>
>>> On 10/08/2020 13:22, Guillaume Tucker wrote:
>>>> The L310_AUX_CTRL_NS_LOCKDOWN flag is set during the L2C enable
>>>> sequence.  There is no need to set it in the default register value,
>>>> this was done before support for it was implemented in the code.  It
>>>> is not set in the hardware initial value either.
>>>>
>>>> Clean this up by removing this flag from the default l2c_aux_val, and
>>>> add it to the l2c_aux_mask to print an alert message if it was already
>>>> set before the kernel initialisation.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Guillaume Tucker <guillaume.tucker@collabora.com>
>>>> ---
>>>>
>>>> Notes:
>>>>     v2: fix flag name L310_AUX_CTRL_NS_LOCKDOWN
>>>>
>>>>  arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c | 4 ++--
>>>>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> I believe this v2 series has addressed all previous comments and
>>> you were waiting for the 5.9 merge window to end.  The patches
>>> all still apply cleanly on v5.9-rc3.  Do you want me to resend
>>> the series anyway or is there anything else needed at this point?
>>>
>>> Maybe one thing that wasn't completely clear in v1 was whether
>>> patch 2/4 was the right approach.  I've explained the reason
>>> behind it but didn't get a final reply from Russell[1].
>>
>> I am sorry, my bad. I already applied this one and 3/4 (dts).
>> Apparently I forgot to reply with confirmation and Patchwork did not
>> notify you for some reason.

No problem, I see them in linux-next now.  Thanks!

>> Patch 2/4 does not look like one for me so I would need ack from
>> Russell to take. Did you submit it to the ARM patches queue?

I've CC-ed linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org on the whole
series.  Did you mean anything else by the ARM patches queue?

>> Patch 4/4 will wait for v5.10-rc1 as it depends on 1/4 and it is DTS patch.
> 
> Correct: Patch 4/4 will wait for v5.10 because it depends on the DTS patch.

Sure, in fact patch 4/4 depends on the DTS one (3/4) and also on
the l2c fix (2/4) as otherwise prefetch would actually not be
enabled.  So it sounds like both remaining ones 2/4 and 4/4 are
actually now pending Russell's ack.

Best wishes,
Guillaume

[1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/46fa1159-fcd6-b528-b8e8-2fba048236b2@collabora.com/