Re: Change in kernel PPS GPIO handling?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]


Am 11.03.22 um 17:37 schrieb Stefan Wahren:
Am 05.03.22 um 12:34 schrieb Stefan Wahren:
Am 04.03.22 um 21:50 schrieb Stefan Wahren:
Am 03.03.22 um 02:29 schrieb Chris Adams:
Once upon a time, Stefan Wahren <stefan.wahren@xxxxxxxx> said:
Hi Chris,

Am 02.03.22 um 10:51 schrieb Peter Robinson:
I have an RPi4 running Fedora 35.  It hadn't been updated in a while, so
I applied updates today.  When I boot to the kernel 5.16.11-200, I lose
the PPS device from my GPS hat.  Boot back to 5.14.16-301.fc35 and it

I'm booting with EFI firmware, and with a device tree config.txt that
All our firmware are EFI, that's the only way we support booting, is
it the default U-Boot based one or are you using the edk2 one?

has "dtoverlay=pps-gpio,gpiopin=4" in it.  I removed the /boot/dtb
symlink and set /etc/u-boot.conf to not re-add it.

When I boot 5.16, I see /proc/device-tree, and it has
/proc/device-tree/pps@4 in it (and the contents look correct), but
loading the pps-gpio kernel module just gives:

pps-gpio: probe of pps@4 failed with error -22
Any chance you can tell us which kernel it started with, 5.14.x to
5.16.x is a big window to debug and looking at kernel logs for
drivers/pps there's been no changes in that space in the 5.15+ kernels
at all.

I wonder if it's a change/regression in the firmware overlay <->
kernel interface.
do you use the DTB file from 5.14.x or 5.16x?

I guess this is related to this commit:

Unfortunately this is a change which requires this DTS fix:

So DTB and kernel must "match".
Okay, so what's the best way to do that?

I have EFI firmware from in /boot/efi, and
the /boot/dtb symlink removed.  The bcm2711-rpi-4-b.dtb file in
/boot/efi is from the file.  I have a
config.txt in /boot/efi that references overlays in /boot/efi/overlays
from RPM bcm283x-overlays (like pps-gpio)..

I'm not quite sure how I need to fit all this together.
Let me recap the situation. mainline and rpi vendor tree are independent
in development. Synchronization (incl. device tree) happens in both

U-Boot bootloader decided to keep an own copy of the mainline DT files
(which is currently based on an older 5.15 version which lacks the
gpio-ranges property). According to this statement [1] the EDK2 UEFI
decided to use the rpi vendor tree and don't care about the mainline DT

I'm sorry but as a spare-time kernel developer, i don't have to time to
fight against all this mess.

I hope i will have some time for debugging in the near future ...

[1] -

Today i tried Fedora 35 Minimal for my first time, here are my test results:

Raspberry Pi 400 32 bit => bus width issue
Raspberry Pi 400 64 bit => hangs while show graphics
Raspberry Pi 4 B 4 GB 32 bit => kernel crash
Raspberry Pi 4 B 4 GB 64 bit => boot into setup
Raspberry Pi 4 B 8 GB 32 bit => black screen, fails to start kernel?
Raspberry Pi 4 B 8 GB 64 bit => boot into setup

At least the 32 bit issues on Raspberry Pi 4 are expected since the
kernel config doesn't have ARM_LPAE enabled.

Okay, here is the explanation for the different behavior on Raspberry Pi
400 and Raspberry Pi 4 B. The Raspberry Pi 400 has a newer BCM2711 SoC
(Stepping C0), which have less DMA restrictions for the emmc2 interface
(responsible for SD card access). For the Raspberry Pi 4 B there are
older boards which have Stepping B0 and all the new boards should have
Stepping C0 [1].

Unfortunately there is no 100% reliable way to detect the stepping from
the kernel side. So currently the Raspberry Pi firmware patches the
dma-ranges in the firmware DT [2]. So in case U-Boot [3] or another
bootloader ignores this firmware DT and read a fresh DTB the right
dma-ranges get lost. Finally this results in unexpected behavior as soon
the emmc2 switches to DMA mode [4].

Okay, at least i found a fix [1] for the 64 bit boot issues (Original Fedora 35, Linux 5.14) with RPi 400/RPi 4 Stepping C0. This requires the DTB files to be updated and U-Boot to choose between the B0 and the C0 variant of the Rpi 4 DTB file.

Unfortunately this doesn't fix the SD card issues on 32 bit.

Best regards

[1] -
arm mailing list -- arm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to arm-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct:
List Guidelines:
List Archives:
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it:

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Linux ARM (Vger)]     [Linux ARM]     [ARM Kernel]     [Fedora User Discussion]     [Older Fedora Users Discussion]     [Fedora Advisory Board]     [Fedora Security]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Devel Java]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Desktop]     [ATA RAID]     [Fedora Marketing]     [Fedora Mentors]     [Fedora Package Announce]     [Fedora Package Review]     [Fedora Music]     [Fedora Packaging]     [Centos]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Coolkey]     [Yum Users]     [Tux]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Apps]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]     [Fedora Art]     [Fedora Docs]     [Asterisk PBX]

Powered by Linux