On Wed, 6 Oct 2021 at 20:24, Manivannan Sadhasivam
<manivannan.sadhasivam@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 05:18:16PM -0500, Bjorn Andersson 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?
> >
>
> Sorry, missed this earlier. I did face the probe deferral issue before and
> submitted a small series for fixing that:
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mtd/20210302132757.225395-1-manivannan.sadhasivam@xxxxxxxxxx/
>
> These 2 patches are in mainline now. Robert, can you make sure that you have
> these 2 patches in your tree?
Hi Mani,
Yes, I have those patches as I am running this on top of 5.15-rc4 currently.
Regards,
Robert
>
> Thanks,
> Mani
>
> > Thanks,
> > Bjorn
