On Fri, Jan 09, 2015 at 02:53:55AM +0000, tthayer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> From: Thor Thayer <tthayer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> Adding L2 Cache and On-Chip RAM EDAC support for the
> Altera SoCs using the EDAC device model. The SDRAM
> controller is using the Memory Controller model.
>
> Each type of ECC is individually configurable.
>
> The SDRAM ECC is a separate Kconfig option because:
> 1) the SDRAM preparation can take almost 2 seconds on boot and some
> customers need a faster boot time.
> 2) the SDRAM has an ECC initialization dependency on the preloader
> which is outside the kernel. It is desirable to be able to turn the
> SDRAM on & off separately.
>
> Signed-off-by: Thor Thayer <tthayer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> v2: Fix L2 dependency comments.
>
> v3: Move OCRAM and L2 cache EDAC functions into altera_edac.c
> instead of separate files.
>
> v4: Change mask defines to use BIT().
> Fix comment style to agree with kernel coding style.
> Better printk description for read != write in trigger.
> Remove SysFS debugging message.
> Better dci->mod_name
> Move gen_pool pointer assignment to end of function.
> Invert logic to reduce indent in ocram depenency check.
> Change from dev_err() to edac_printk()
> Replace magic numbers with defines & comments.
> Improve error injection test.
> Change Makefile intermediary name to altr (from alt)
>
> v5: No change.
>
> v6: Convert to nested EDAC in device tree. Force L2 cache
> on for L2Cache ECC & remove L2 cache syscon for checking
> enable bit. Update year in header.
> ---
> drivers/edac/Kconfig | 16 ++
> drivers/edac/Makefile | 5 +-
> drivers/edac/altera_edac.c | 506 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> 3 files changed, 524 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
[...]
> +/************************* EDAC Parent Probe *************************/
> +
> +static const struct of_device_id altr_edac_device_of_match[];
Huh? What's this for?
> +static const struct of_device_id altr_edac_of_match[] = {
> + { .compatible = "altr,edac" },
> + {},
> +};
> +MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, altr_edac_of_match);
I know it may seem like a minor thing, but the documentation really
should have come in an earlier patch. It's painful to review a patch
series when you have to randomly just to the end of hte series to see
the documentation.
The name is _very_ generic here. Do we not have a more specific name for
the EDAC block in your SoC?
Is there actually a specific EDAC device, or are you just grouping some
portions of HW blocks into an EDAC device to match what the Linux EDAC
framework wants?
[...]
> +ssize_t altr_edac_device_trig(struct edac_device_ctl_info *edac_dci,
> + const char *buffer, size_t count)
> +{
> + u32 *ptemp, i, error_mask;
> + int result = 0;
> + unsigned long flags;
> + struct altr_edac_device_dev *drvdata = edac_dci->pvt_info;
> + const struct edac_device_prv_data *priv = drvdata->data;
> + void *generic_ptr = edac_dci->dev;
Huh? What's hidden behind this "generic_ptr"?
> +
> + if (!priv->alloc_mem)
> + return -ENOMEM;
> +
> + /*
> + * Note that generic_ptr is initialized to the device * but in
> + * some alloc_functions, this is overridden and returns data.
> + */
> + ptemp = priv->alloc_mem(priv->trig_alloc_sz, &generic_ptr);
> + if (!ptemp) {
> + edac_printk(KERN_ERR, EDAC_DEVICE,
> + "Inject: Buffer Allocation error\n");
> + return -ENOMEM;
> + }
> +
> + if (buffer[0] == ALTR_UE_TRIGGER_CHAR)
> + error_mask = priv->ue_set_mask;
> + else
> + error_mask = priv->ce_set_mask;
> +
> + edac_printk(KERN_ALERT, EDAC_DEVICE,
> + "Trigger Error Mask (0x%X)\n", error_mask);
> +
> + local_irq_save(flags);
> + /* write ECC corrupted data out. */
> + for (i = 0; i < (priv->trig_alloc_sz / sizeof(*ptemp)); i++) {
> + /* Read data so we're in the correct state */
> + rmb();
> + if (ACCESS_ONCE(ptemp[i]))
> + result = -1;
Perhaps s/result/err/? You could even have an err_count, which would
give you slightly more useful output.
> + /* Toggle Error bit (it is latched), leave ECC enabled */
> + writel(error_mask, drvdata->base);
> + writel(priv->ecc_enable_mask, drvdata->base);
> + ptemp[i] = i;
> + }
> + /* Ensure it has been written out */
> + wmb();
> + local_irq_restore(flags);
> +
> + if (result)
> + edac_printk(KERN_ERR, EDAC_DEVICE, "Mem Not Cleared\n");
> +
> + /* Read out written data. ECC error caused here */
> + for (i = 0; i < ALTR_TRIGGER_READ_WRD_CNT; i++)
> + if (ACCESS_ONCE(ptemp[i]) != i)
> + edac_printk(KERN_ERR, EDAC_DEVICE,
> + "Read doesn't match written data\n");
> +
> + if (priv->free_mem)
> + priv->free_mem(ptemp, priv->trig_alloc_sz, generic_ptr);
> +
> + return count;
> +}
[...]
> +static void *ocram_alloc_mem(size_t size, void **other)
> +{
> + struct device_node *np;
> + struct gen_pool *gp;
> + void *sram_addr;
> +
> + np = of_find_compatible_node(NULL, NULL, "altr,ocram-edac");
> + if (!np)
> + return NULL;
> +
> + gp = of_get_named_gen_pool(np, "iram", 0);
> + if (!gp) {
> + of_node_put(np);
> + return NULL;
> + }
> + of_node_put(np);
> +
> + sram_addr = (void *)gen_pool_alloc(gp, size / sizeof(size_t));
I'm still very much confused by this sizeof(size_t) division, but
hopefully your response to my earlier query will answer that.
[...]
> +static void *l2_alloc_mem(size_t size, void **other)
> +{
> + struct device *dev = *other;
> + void *ptemp = devm_kzalloc(dev, size, GFP_KERNEL);
> +
> + if (!ptemp)
> + return NULL;
> +
> + /* Make sure everything is written out */
> + wmb();
> +
> + /*
> + * Clean all cache levels up to LoC (includes L2)
> + * This ensures the corrupted data is written into
> + * L2 cache for readback test (which causes ECC error).
> + */
> + flush_cache_all();
I'm a little confused by this comment (especially w.r.t. the L2 being
before the LoC). Are we attempting to flush everything _to_ the L2, or
beyond/out-of the L2? As far as I can see flush_cache_all will only
achieve the former, and not the latter, as it doesn't seem to perform
any outer cache operations.
Per the architecture, Set/Way maintenance of this form won't always act
as you expect (though I believe that for Cortex-A9 it does).
> +
> + return ptemp;
> +}
> +
> +static void l2_free_mem(void *p, size_t size, void *other)
> +{
> + struct device *dev = other;
> +
> + if (dev && p)
> + devm_kfree(dev, p);
Is this ever called in that case?
Thanks,
Mark.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-doc" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
