RE: [PATCH] arm64: dts: renesas: r8a7796: Add CMT device nodes

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hi Daniel,

Thanks for the feedback.

> >> Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: dts: renesas: r8a7796: Add CMT device
> >> nodes
> >>
> >> On 26/10/2018 10:25, Biju Das wrote:
> >>> This patch adds CMT{0|1|2|3} device nodes for r8a7796 SoC.
> >>>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Biju Das <biju.das@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >>> ---
> >>> This patch is tested against renesas-dev
> >>>
> >>> I have executed on inconsistency-check, nanosleep and
> >>> clocksource_switch selftests on this arm64 SoC. The
> >>> inconsistency-check and nanosleep tests are working fine.The
> >>> clocksource_switch asynchronous test is failing due to
> >>> inconsistency-check
> >> failure on "arch_sys_counter".
> >>>
> >>> But if i skip the clocksource_switching of "arch_sys_counter", the
> >>> asynchronous test is passing for CMT0/1/2/3 timer.
> >>>
> >>> Has any one noticed this issue?
> >>
> >> So now that you mention that, I've been through the
> >> clocksource_switch on another ARM64 platform (hikey960) and disabled
> >> the
> >> ARM64_ERRATUM_858921 config option. I can see the same issue.
> >>
> >> Is this option set on your config ?
> >
> > No.  As per  " config ARM64_ERRATUM_858921", it is "Workaround for
> Cortex-A73 erratum 858921"
> >
> > Our SoC is 2xCA-57 + 4 x CA-53.  Does  it impact CA-57 + CA_53?
>
> Dunno :/
>
> > Any way I will enable this config option and will provide you the results.
>
> Ok, thanks!

The following config is enabled by default on upstream kernel(4.20-rc3)
CONFIG_ARM_ARCH_TIMER_EVTSTREAM=y
CONFIG_ARM_ARCH_TIMER_OOL_WORKAROUND=y
CONFIG_FSL_ERRATUM_A008585=y
CONFIG_HISILICON_ERRATUM_161010101=y
CONFIG_ARM64_ERRATUM_858921=y

For a quick testing,  I have activated the erratum using the property "fsl,erratum-a008585" on device tree.
With this I confirm the issue is fixed.

I have  some questions on this.
1) Based  on the test result ,do you think renesas soc also  impacted by the ARM64_ERRATUM_858921?
2) Is there any way to find, is this Erratum actually causing the asynchronous test to fail?

timer {
                compatible = "arm,armv8-timer";
                interrupts-extended = <&gic GIC_PPI 13 (GIC_CPU_MASK_SIMPLE(6) | IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_LOW)>,
                                      <&gic GIC_PPI 14 (GIC_CPU_MASK_SIMPLE(6) | IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_LOW)>,
                                      <&gic GIC_PPI 11 (GIC_CPU_MASK_SIMPLE(6) | IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_LOW)>,
                                      <&gic GIC_PPI 10 (GIC_CPU_MASK_SIMPLE(6) | IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_LOW)>;
+                fsl,erratum-a008585;
}

Regards,
Biju



Renesas Electronics Europe Ltd, Dukes Meadow, Millboard Road, Bourne End, Buckinghamshire, SL8 5FH, UK. Registered in England & Wales under Registered No. 04586709.




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Samsung SOC]     [Linux Wireless]     [Linux Kernel]     [ATH6KL]     [Linux Bluetooth]     [Linux Netdev]     [Kernel Newbies]     [IDE]     [Security]     [Git]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux ATA RAID]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]

  Powered by Linux