On Thu, 23 Sept 2021 at 00:18, Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Wed 22 Sep 15:23 CDT 2021, Robert Marko wrote: > > > On Tue, 21 Sept 2021 at 08:24, Kathiravan T <kathirav@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > On 2021-09-20 14:55, Robert Marko wrote: > > > > On Mon, 20 Sept 2021 at 04:52, Bjorn Andersson > > > > <bjorn.andersson@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > >> > > > >> On Thu 02 Sep 16:47 CDT 2021, Robert Marko wrote: > > > >> > > > >> > IPQ8074 uses SMEM like other modern QCA SoC-s, so since its already > > > >> > supported by the kernel add the required DT nodes. > > > >> > > > > >> > Signed-off-by: Robert Marko <robimarko@xxxxxxxxx> > > > >> > > > >> Thanks for your patch Robert. > > > >> > > > >> > --- > > > >> > arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/ipq8074.dtsi | 28 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > > >> > 1 file changed, 28 insertions(+) > > > >> > > > > >> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/ipq8074.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/ipq8074.dtsi > > > >> > index a620ac0d0b19..83e9243046aa 100644 > > > >> > --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/ipq8074.dtsi > > > >> > +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/ipq8074.dtsi > > > >> > @@ -82,6 +82,29 @@ scm { > > > >> > }; > > > >> > }; > > > >> > > > > >> > + reserved-memory { > > > >> > + #address-cells = <2>; > > > >> > + #size-cells = <2>; > > > >> > + ranges; > > > >> > + > > > >> > + smem_region: memory@4ab00000 { > > > >> > + no-map; > > > >> > + reg = <0x0 0x4ab00000 0x0 0x00100000>; > > > >> > + }; > > > >> > + }; > > > >> > + > > > >> > + tcsr_mutex: hwlock { > > > >> > + compatible = "qcom,tcsr-mutex"; > > > >> > + syscon = <&tcsr_mutex_regs 0 0x80>; > > > >> > > > >> Since it's not okay to have a lone "syscon" and I didn't think it was > > > >> worth coming up with a binding for the TCSR mutex "syscon" I rewrote > > > >> the > > > >> binding a while back. As such qcom,tcsr-mutex should now live in /soc > > > >> directly. > > > >> > > > >> So can you please respin accordingly? > > > > > > > > Sure, can you just confirm that the: > > > > reg = <0x01905000 0x8000>; > > > > > > > > Is the whole TCSR range as I don't have docs? > > > > > > Robert, > > > > > > TCSR_MUTEX block starts from 0x01905000 and has size 0x20000 (128KB) > > > > Thanks, Kathiravan, > > TSCR mutex with MMIO reg under it works, but there is some weird probe > > ordering issue. > > > > For whatever reason, SMEM will get probed only after MTD does and this > > will cause issues > > if SMEM parser is used as it will return -EPROBE_DEFER but the MTD > > core does not really > > handle it correctly and causes the device to reboot after failed parsing. > > > > Now, I have no idea why does this variant which uses MMIO regmap probe > > so much later? > > > > Mani, do you have any input related to the probe deferral of the SMEM > partition parser, because SMEM not yet probed? I did some more digging as it made no sense to me and it looks like it gets to driver_deferred_probe_add() but then gets stuck in the mutex_lock() after which it resets the board without any kind of error. I can see that it gets to this mutex_lock(): https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v5.15-rc4/source/drivers/base/dd.c#L136 So, this is some weird bug unrelated to the SMEM itself, but it's an annoying one as it resets the board. I am now kind of stuck debugging it further, this is beyond my capabilities. Regards, Robert > > Thanks, > Bjorn