17.07.2019 9:36, Sowjanya Komatineni пишет: > > On 7/16/19 11:33 PM, Dmitry Osipenko wrote: >> В Tue, 16 Jul 2019 22:55:52 -0700 >> Sowjanya Komatineni <skomatineni@xxxxxxxxxx> пишет: >> >>> On 7/16/19 10:42 PM, Dmitry Osipenko wrote: >>>> В Tue, 16 Jul 2019 22:25:25 -0700 >>>> Sowjanya Komatineni <skomatineni@xxxxxxxxxx> пишет: >>>> >>>>> On 7/16/19 9:11 PM, Dmitry Osipenko wrote: >>>>>> В Tue, 16 Jul 2019 19:35:49 -0700 >>>>>> Sowjanya Komatineni <skomatineni@xxxxxxxxxx> пишет: >>>>>> >>>>>>> On 7/16/19 7:18 PM, Sowjanya Komatineni wrote: >>>>>>>> On 7/16/19 3:06 PM, Sowjanya Komatineni wrote: >>>>>>>>> On 7/16/19 3:00 PM, Dmitry Osipenko wrote: >>>>>>>>>> 17.07.2019 0:35, Sowjanya Komatineni пишет: >>>>>>>>>>> On 7/16/19 2:21 PM, Dmitry Osipenko wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> 17.07.2019 0:12, Sowjanya Komatineni пишет: >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 7/16/19 1:47 PM, Dmitry Osipenko wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 16.07.2019 22:26, Sowjanya Komatineni пишет: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 7/16/19 11:43 AM, Dmitry Osipenko wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 16.07.2019 21:30, Sowjanya Komatineni пишет: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 7/16/19 11:25 AM, Dmitry Osipenko wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 16.07.2019 21:19, Sowjanya Komatineni пишет: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 7/16/19 9:50 AM, Sowjanya Komatineni wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 7/16/19 8:00 AM, Dmitry Osipenko wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 16.07.2019 11:06, Peter De Schrijver пишет: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jul 16, 2019 at 03:24:26PM +0800, Joseph >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Lo wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> OK, Will add to CPUFreq driver... >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The other thing that also need attention is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that T124 CPUFreq >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> driver >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> implicitly relies on DFLL driver to be probed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> first, which is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> icky. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Should I add check for successful dfll clk >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> register explicitly in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CPUFreq driver probe and defer till dfll clk >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> registers? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Probably you should use the "device links". See >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [1][2] for the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> example. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [1] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v5.2.1/source/drivers/gpu/drm/tegra/dc.c#L2383 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [2] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/driver-api/device_link.html >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Return EPROBE_DEFER instead of EINVAL if >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> device_link_add() fails. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> And >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> use of_find_device_by_node() to get the DFLL's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> device, see [3]. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [3] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git/tree/drivers/devfreq/tegra20-devfreq.c#n100 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Will go thru and add... >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Looks like I initially confused this case with getting >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> orphaned clock. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm now seeing that the DFLL driver registers the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> clock and then >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> clk_get(dfll) should be returning EPROBE_DEFER until >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> DFLL driver is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> probed, hence everything should be fine as-is and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> there is no real >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> need >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for the 'device link'. Sorry for the confusion! >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sorry, I didn't follow the mail thread. Just >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> regarding the DFLL >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> part. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As you know it, the DFLL clock is one of the CPU >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> clock sources and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> integrated with DVFS control logic with the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> regulator. We will not >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> switch >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CPU to other clock sources once we switched to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> DFLL. Because the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CPU has >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> been regulated by the DFLL HW with the DVFS table >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (CVB or OPP >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> table >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you see >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in the driver.). We shouldn't reparent it to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> other sources with >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> unknew >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> freq/volt pair. That's not guaranteed to work. We >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> allow switching to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> open-loop mode but different sources. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Okay, then the CPUFreq driver will have to enforce >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> DFLL freq to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> PLLP's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rate before switching to PLLP in order to have a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> proper CPU voltage. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> PLLP freq is safe to work for any CPU voltage. So no >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> need to enforce >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> DFLL freq to PLLP rate before changing CCLK_G source >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to PLLP during >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> suspend >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sorry, please ignore my above comment. During >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> suspend, need to change >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CCLK_G source to PLLP when dfll is in closed loop >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mode first and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> then >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dfll need to be set to open loop. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Okay. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> And I don't exactly understand why we need to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> switch to PLLP in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CPU >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> idle >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> driver. Just keep it on CL-DVFS mode all the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> time. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In SC7 entry, the dfll suspend function moves it >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the open-loop >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mode. That's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> all. The sc7-entryfirmware will handle the rest >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of the sequence to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> turn off >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the CPU power. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In SC7 resume, the warmboot code will handle the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sequence to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> turn on >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> regulator and power up the CPU cluster. And leave >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it on PLL_P. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> After >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> resuming to the kernel, we re-init DFLL, restore >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the CPU clock >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> policy (CPU >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> runs on DFLL open-loop mode) and then moving to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> close-loop mode. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The DFLL is re-inited after switching CCLK to DFLL >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> parent during of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> early clocks-state restoring by CaR driver. Hence >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> instead of having >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> odd >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hacks in the CaR driver, it is much nicer to have a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> proper suspend-resume sequencing of the device >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> drivers. In this case >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CPUFreq >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> driver is the driver that enables DFLL and switches >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CPU to that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> clock >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> source, which means that this driver is also should >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be responsible for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> management of the DFLL's state during of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> suspend/resume process. If >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CPUFreq driver disables DFLL during suspend and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> re-enables it >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> during >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> resume, then looks like the CaR driver hacks around >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> DFLL are not >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> needed. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The DFLL part looks good to me. BTW, change the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> patch subject to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "Add >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> suspend-resume support" seems more appropriate to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> me. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To clarify this, the sequences for DFLL use are as >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> follows (assuming >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> all >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> required DFLL hw configuration has been done) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Switch to DFLL: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 0) Save current parent and frequency >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1) Program DFLL to open loop mode >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2) Enable DFLL >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3) Change cclk_g parent to DFLL >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For OVR regulator: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 4) Change PWM output pin from tristate to output >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 5) Enable DFLL PWM output >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For I2C regulator: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 4) Enable DFLL I2C output >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 6) Program DFLL to closed loop mode >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Switch away from DFLL: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 0) Change cclk_g parent to PLLP so the CPU >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> frequency is ok for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> any >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> vdd_cpu voltage >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1) Program DFLL to open loop mode >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I see during switch away from DFLL (suspend), cclk_g >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> parent is not >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> changed to PLLP before changing dfll to open loop >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mode. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Will add this ... >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The CPUFreq driver switches parent to PLLP during the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> probe, similar >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be done on suspend. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm also wondering if it's always safe to switch to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> PLLP in the probe. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If CPU is running on a lower freq than PLLP, then some >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> other more >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> appropriate intermediate parent should be selected. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CPU parents are PLL_X, PLL_P, and dfll. PLL_X always >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> runs at higher >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rate >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> so switching to PLL_P during CPUFreq probe prior to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dfll clock enable >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be safe. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> AFAIK, PLLX could run at ~200MHz. There is also a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> divided output of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> PLLP >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> which CCLKG supports, the PLLP_OUT4. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Probably, realistically, CPU is always running off a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fast PLLX during >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> boot, but I'm wondering what may happen on KEXEC. I >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> guess ideally CPUFreq driver should also have a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 'shutdown' callback to teardown DFLL >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on a reboot, but likely that there are other >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> clock-related problems as >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> well that may break KEXEC and thus it is not very >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> important at the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> moment. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [snip] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> During bootup CPUG sources from PLL_X. By PLL_P source >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> above I meant >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> PLL_P_OUT4. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As per clock policies, PLL_X is always used for high freq >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> like >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 800Mhz >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and for low frequency it will be sourced from PLLP. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Alright, then please don't forget to pre-initialize >>>>>>>>>>>>>> PLLP_OUT4 rate to a >>>>>>>>>>>>>> reasonable value using tegra_clk_init_table or >>>>>>>>>>>>>> assigned-clocks. >>>>>>>>>>>>> PLLP_OUT4 rate update is not needed as it is safe to run at >>>>>>>>>>>>> 408Mhz because it is below fmax @ Vmin >>>>>>>>>>>> So even 204MHz CVB entries are having the same voltage as >>>>>>>>>>>> 408MHz, correct? It's not instantly obvious to me from the >>>>>>>>>>>> DFLL driver's code where the fmax @ Vmin is defined, I see >>>>>>>>>>>> that there is the min_millivolts >>>>>>>>>>>> and frequency entries starting from 204MHZ defined >>>>>>>>>>>> per-table. >>>>>>>>>>> Yes at Vmin CPU Fmax is ~800Mhz. So anything below that will >>>>>>>>>>> work at Vmin voltage and PLLP max is 408Mhz. >>>>>>>>>> Thank you for the clarification. It would be good to have that >>>>>>>>>> commented >>>>>>>>>> in the code as well. >>>>>>>>> OK, Will add... >>>>>>>> Regarding, adding suspend/resume to CPUFreq, CPUFreq suspend >>>>>>>> happens very early even before disabling non-boot CPUs and also >>>>>>>> need to export clock driver APIs to CPUFreq. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Was thinking of below way of implementing this... >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Clock DFLL driver Suspend: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> - Save CPU clock policy registers, and Perform dfll >>>>>>>> suspend which sets in open loop mode >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> CPU Freq driver Suspend: does nothing >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Clock DFLL driver Resume: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> - Re-init DFLL, Set in Open-Loop mode, restore CPU >>>>>>>> Clock policy registers which actually sets source to DFLL along >>>>>>>> with other CPU Policy register restore. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> CPU Freq driver Resume: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> - do clk_prepare_enable which acutally sets DFLL in >>>>>>>> Closed loop mode >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Adding one more note: Switching CPU Clock to PLLP is not needed >>>>>>>> as CPU CLock can be from dfll in open-loop mode as DFLL is not >>>>>>>> disabled anywhere throught the suspend/resume path and SC7 entry >>>>>>>> FW and Warm boot code will switch CPU source to PLLP. >>>>>> Since CPU resumes on PLLP, it will be cleaner to suspend it on >>>>>> PLLP as well. And besides, seems that currently disabling DFLL >>>>>> clock will disable DFLL completely and then you'd want to re-init >>>>>> the DFLL on resume any ways. So better to just disable DFLL >>>>>> completely on suspend, which should happen on clk_disable(dfll). >>>>> Will switch to PLLP during CPUFreq suspend. With decision of using >>>>> clk_disable during suspend, its mandatory to switch to PLLP as DFLL >>>>> is completely disabled. >>>>> >>>>> My earlier concern was on restoring CPU policy as we can't do that >>>>> from CPUFreq driver and need export from clock driver. >>>>> >>>>> Clear now and will do CPU clock policy restore in after dfll >>>>> re-init. >>>> Why the policy can't be saved/restored by the CaR driver as a >>>> context of any other clock? >>> restoring cpu clock policy involves programming source and >>> super_cclkg_divider. >>> >>> cclk_g is registered as clk_super_mux and it doesn't use frac_div ops >>> to do save/restore its divider. >> That can be changed of course and I guess it also could be as simple as >> saving and restoring of two raw u32 values of the policy/divider >> registers. >> >>> Also, during clock context we cant restore cclk_g as cclk_g source >>> will be dfll and dfll will not be resumed/re-initialized by the time >>> clk_super_mux save/restore happens. >>> >>> we can't use save/restore context for dfll clk_ops because >>> dfllCPU_out parent to CCLK_G is first in the clock tree and dfll_ref >>> and dfll_soc peripheral clocks are not restored by the time dfll >>> restore happens. Also dfll peripheral clock enables need to be >>> restored before dfll restore happens which involves programming dfll >>> controller for re-initialization. >>> >>> So dfll resume/re-init is done in clk-tegra210 at end of all clocks >>> restore in V5 series but instead of in clk-tegra210 driver I moved >>> now to dfll-fcpu driver pm_ops as all dfll dependencies will be >>> restored thru clk_restore_context by then. This will be in V6. >> Since DFLL is now guaranteed to be disabled across CaR suspend/resume >> (hence it has nothing to do in regards to CCLK) and given that PLLs >> state is restored before the rest of the clocks, I don't see why not to >> implement CCLK save/restore in a generic fasion. CPU policy wull be >> restored to either PLLP or PLLX (if CPUFreq driver is disabled). >> > CCLK_G save/restore should happen in clk_super_mux ops save/context and > clk_super_mux save/restore happens very early as cclk_g is first in the > clock tree and save/restore traverses through the tree top-bottom order. If CCLK_G is restored before the PLLs, then just change the clocks order such that it won't happen. > DFLL enable thru CPUFreq resume happens after all clk_restore_context > happens. So during clk_restore_context, dfll re-init doesnt happen and > doing cpu clock policy restore during super_mux clk_ops will crash as > DFLL is not initialized and its clock is not enabled but CPU clock > restore sets source to DFLL if we restore during super_clk_mux If CPU was suspended on PLLP, then it will be restored on PLLP by CaR. I don't understand what DFLL has to do with the CCLK in that case during the clocks restore.