On 2020-03-13 02:19, Matthias Kaehlcke wrote:
Hi Matthias,
Thanks for reviewing.
Hi Pradeep,
On Thu, Mar 12, 2020 at 11:31:50AM +0530, Pradeep P V K wrote:
Add interconnect bandwidths for SDHC driver using OPP framework that
is required by SDHC driver based on the clock frequency and bus width
of the card. Otherwise, the system clocks may run at minimum clock
speed and thus affecting the performance.
This change is based on
[RFC] mmc: host: sdhci-msm: Use the interconnect API
(https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/10/11/499) and
[PATCH v6] Introduce Bandwidth OPPs for interconnects
(https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/12/6/740)
Co-developed-by: Sahitya Tummala <stummala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Sahitya Tummala <stummala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Co-developed-by: Subhash Jadavani <subhashj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Subhash Jadavani <subhashj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Co-developed-by: Veerabhadrarao Badiganti <vbadigan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Veerabhadrarao Badiganti <vbadigan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Co-developed-by: Pradeep P V K <ppvk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Pradeep P V K <ppvk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
RFC v4 -> v5:
- Rewrote the icc interconnect get handlers and its error handling
and allocated vote data after handling all icc get handler errors.
- Removed explicit error check on ICC handlers.
- Addressed minor code style comments.
drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-msm.c | 231
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
1 file changed, 227 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-msm.c
b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-msm.c
index 09ff731..5fe8fad 100644
--- a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-msm.c
+++ b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-msm.c
...
+/*
+ * This function sets the interconnect bus bandwidth
+ * vote based on bw (bandwidth) argument.
+ */
+#define BUS_INTERCONNECT_PATHS 2 /* 1. sdhc -> ddr 2. cpu -> sdhc */
+static void sdhci_msm_bus_set_vote(struct sdhci_host *host,
+ unsigned int bw)
+{
+ int i, err;
+ struct sdhci_pltfm_host *pltfm_host = sdhci_priv(host);
+ struct sdhci_msm_host *msm_host = sdhci_pltfm_priv(pltfm_host);
+ struct sdhci_msm_bus_vote_data *vote_data = msm_host->bus_vote_data;
+ struct device *dev = &msm_host->pdev->dev;
+ struct dev_pm_opp *opp;
+ unsigned long freq = bw;
+ unsigned long peak_bw[BUS_INTERCONNECT_PATHS] = {0};
+ unsigned long avg_bw[BUS_INTERCONNECT_PATHS] = {0};
+
+ if (bw == vote_data->curr_freq)
+ return;
+
+ for (i = 0; i < BUS_INTERCONNECT_PATHS; i++) {
+ opp = sdhci_msm_find_opp_for_freq(msm_host, freq);
+ if (opp) {
+ avg_bw[i] = dev_pm_opp_get_bw(opp, &peak_bw[i]);
+ freq += 1; /* Next bandwidth vote */
+ dev_pm_opp_put(opp);
+ }
+ }
+ pr_debug("%s: freq:%d sdhc_to_ddr avg_bw:%lu peak_bw:%lu cpu_to_sdhc
avg_bw:%lu peak_bw:%lu\n",
+ mmc_hostname(host->mmc), bw, avg_bw[0], peak_bw[0],
+ avg_bw[1], peak_bw[1]);
+ err = icc_set_bw(vote_data->sdhc_to_ddr, 0, peak_bw[0]);
+ if (err) {
+ dev_err(dev, "icc_set() failed for 'sdhc-ddr' path err:%d\n",
+ err);
nit: the alignment is odd, either align with 'dev' or a tab after
'dev_err'
sure, will do this in my next patch set.
+ return;
+ }
+ err = icc_set_bw(vote_data->cpu_to_sdhc, 0, peak_bw[1]);
+ if (err) {
+ dev_err(dev, "icc_set() failed for 'cpu-sdhc' path err:%d\n",
+ err);
ditto
ok.
+ return;
+ }
+ vote_data->curr_freq = bw;
+}
+
+/*
+ * Helper function to register for OPP and interconnect
+ * frameworks.
+ */
+static struct sdhci_msm_bus_vote_data
+ *sdhci_msm_bus_register(struct sdhci_msm_host *host,
+ struct platform_device *pdev)
+{
+ struct sdhci_msm_bus_vote_data *vote_data;
+ struct device *dev = &pdev->dev;
+ int ret, i, err;
nit: you can get rid of 'ret' and use 'err' instead.
ok. i will do this in my next patchset.
+ struct icc_path *icc_paths[BUS_INTERCONNECT_PATHS];
+ const char *path_names[] = {
+ "sdhc-ddr",
+ "cpu-sdhc",
+ };
+
+ for (i = 0; i < BUS_INTERCONNECT_PATHS; i++)
+ icc_paths[i] = of_icc_get(&pdev->dev, path_names[i]);
+
+ if (!icc_paths[0] && !icc_paths[1]) {
+ dev_info(&pdev->dev, "ICC DT property is missing.Skip vote!!\n");
+ return NULL;
+ }
+
+ for (i = 0; i < BUS_INTERCONNECT_PATHS; i++) {
+ if (!icc_paths[i]) {
+ dev_err(&pdev->dev, "interconnect path '%s' is not configured\n",
+ path_names[i]);
+ err = -EINVAL;
+ goto handle_err;
+ }
+ if (IS_ERR(icc_paths[i])) {
+ err = PTR_ERR(icc_paths[i]);
+
+ if (err != -EPROBE_DEFER)
+ dev_err(&pdev->dev, "interconnect path '%s' is invalid:%d\n",
+ path_names[i], err);
+ goto handle_err;
+ }
+ }
+
+ ret = dev_pm_opp_of_add_table(dev);
+ if (ret) {
+ if (ret == -ENODEV || ret == -ENODATA)
+ dev_err(dev, "OPP dt properties missing:%d\n", ret);
+ else
+ dev_err(dev, "OPP registration failed:%d\n", ret);
need to call icc_put() for the two paths?
hmm yes. coming here means, we got both icc paths without error.
So, should put both icc paths. I will handle this by adding a new goto
jump tag.
+ return ERR_PTR(ret);
+ }
+
+ vote_data = devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof(*vote_data), GFP_KERNEL);
+ if (!vote_data)
ditto
probably you want to do this with a jump to an error handler below.
ok. i will handle this by adding a new goto jump tag.
+ return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);
+
+ vote_data->sdhc_to_ddr = icc_paths[0];
+ vote_data->cpu_to_sdhc = icc_paths[1];
+ return vote_data;
nit: add empty line
ok.
+handle_err:
+ if (err) {
+ int other = (i == 0) ? 1 : 0;
+
+ if (!IS_ERR_OR_NULL(icc_paths[other]))
+ icc_put(icc_paths[other]);
+ }
doing this at the end (as opposed to my suggestion from
https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11388409/#23165321) has the
advantage of
keeping the above loop cleaner from error handling cruft, on the
downside it
is probably easier to understand right away in the context of the loop.
I
guess you can do it either way.
True. i will leave this error handling at bottom as the code looks more
cleaner.
It might get a bit more messy if you also handle the case where both
paths are
valid. If that gets too involved I'd suggest to hnadle the above case
inside
the loop.
hmm true, handling the above error in loop making the code more messy
so,
i'm using a new tag (put_icc) to put both the icc paths.
+ return ERR_PTR(err);
+}
+
+static void sdhci_msm_bus_unregister(struct device *dev,
+ struct sdhci_msm_host *host)
+{
+ struct sdhci_msm_bus_vote_data *vote_data = host->bus_vote_data;
+
+ if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(vote_data))
I think 'if (!vote_data)' would be sufficient, since _probe() aborts in
case of an error.
ok. i will handle this in my next patch set.
+ return;
+
+ icc_put(vote_data->sdhc_to_ddr);
+ icc_put(vote_data->cpu_to_sdhc);
+}
+
+static void sdhci_msm_bus_voting(struct sdhci_host *host, bool
enable)
+{
+ struct mmc_ios *ios = &host->mmc->ios;
+ struct sdhci_pltfm_host *pltfm_host = sdhci_priv(host);
+ struct sdhci_msm_host *msm_host = sdhci_pltfm_priv(pltfm_host);
+ unsigned int bw;
+
+ if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(msm_host->bus_vote_data))
+ return;
ditto
ok.
