On 2020-05-11 19:46, Sai Prakash Ranjan wrote:
Hi Mike,
On 2020-05-11 16:44, Mike Leach wrote:
[...]
I checked with the debug team and there is a limitation with
the replicator(swao_replicator) in the AOSS group where it
loses the idfilter register context when the clock is disabled.
This is not just in SC7180 SoC but also reported on some latest
upcoming QCOM SoCs as well and will need to be taken care in
order to enable coresight on these chipsets.
Here's what's happening - After the replicator is initialized,
the clock is disabled in amba_pm_runtime_suspend() as a part of
pm runtime workqueue with the assumption that there will be no
loss of context after the replicator is initialized. But it doesn't
hold good with the replicators with these unfortunate limitation
and the idfilter register context is lost.
[ 5.889406] amba_pm_runtime_suspend devname=6b06000.replicator
ret=0
[ 5.914516] Workqueue: pm pm_runtime_work
[ 5.918648] Call trace:
[ 5.921185] dump_backtrace+0x0/0x1d0
[ 5.924958] show_stack+0x2c/0x38
[ 5.928382] dump_stack+0xc0/0x104
[ 5.931896] amba_pm_runtime_suspend+0xd8/0xe0
[ 5.936469] __rpm_callback+0xe0/0x140
[ 5.940332] rpm_callback+0x38/0x98
[ 5.943926] rpm_suspend+0xec/0x618
[ 5.947522] rpm_idle+0x5c/0x3f8
[ 5.950851] pm_runtime_work+0xa8/0xc0
[ 5.954718] process_one_work+0x1f8/0x4c0
[ 5.958848] worker_thread+0x50/0x468
[ 5.962623] kthread+0x12c/0x158
[ 5.965957] ret_from_fork+0x10/0x1c
This is a platform/SoC specific replicator issue, so we can either
introduce some DT property for replicators to identify which
replicator
has this limitation, check in replicator_enable() and reset the
registers
or have something like below diff to check the idfilter registers in
replicator_enable() and then reset with clear comment specifying it’s
the
hardware limitation on some QCOM SoCs. Please let me know your
thoughts
on
this?
Sorry for hurrying up and sending the patch -
https://lore.kernel.org/patchwork/patch/1239923/.
I will send v2 based on further feedbacks here or there.
1) does this replicator part have a unique ID that differs from the
standard ARM designed replicators?
If so perhaps link the modification into this. (even if the part no in
PIDR0/1 is the same the UCI should be different for a different
implementation)
pid=0x2bb909 for both replicators. So part number is same.
UCI will be different for different implementation(QCOM maybe
different from ARM),
but will it be different for different replicators under the same
impl(i.e., on QCOM).
Here is the cid=0xb105900d for both replicators.
Thanks,
Sai
--
QUALCOMM INDIA, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a
member
of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation
