On Mon, Jun 5, 2023 at 9:18 PM Tony Lindgren <tony@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> * Chen-Yu Tsai <wenst@xxxxxxxxxxxx> [230605 13:01]:
> > On Mon, Jun 5, 2023 at 8:24 PM Tony Lindgren <tony@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > * Chen-Yu Tsai <wenst@xxxxxxxxxxxx> [230605 11:34]:
> > > > On Mon, Jun 5, 2023 at 2:15 PM Tony Lindgren <tony@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > > diff --git a/drivers/tty/serial/8250/8250_mtk.c b/drivers/tty/serial/8250/8250_mtk.c
> > > > > --- a/drivers/tty/serial/8250/8250_mtk.c
> > > > > +++ b/drivers/tty/serial/8250/8250_mtk.c
> > > > > @@ -425,11 +439,10 @@ mtk8250_set_termios(struct uart_port *port, struct ktermios *termios,
> > > > > static int __maybe_unused mtk8250_runtime_suspend(struct device *dev)
> > > > > {
> > > > > struct mtk8250_data *data = dev_get_drvdata(dev);
> > > > > - struct uart_8250_port *up = serial8250_get_port(data->line);
> > > > >
> > > > > /* wait until UART in idle status */
> > > > > while
> > > > > - (serial_in(up, MTK_UART_DEBUG0));
> > > > > + (mtk8250_read(data, MTK_UART_DEBUG0));
> > > >
> > > > I believe it still gets stuck here sometimes.
> > >
> > > Hmm so maybe you need to mtk8250_write(data, 0, MTK_UART_RATE_FIX) in
> > > probe before pm_runtime_resume_and_get() that enables the baud clock?
> > > That's something I changed, so maybe it messes up things.
> >
> > I think it has something to do with the do_pm() function calling
> > the callbacks directly, then also calling runtime PM.
>
> Yeah I'm not following really what's going on there.. So then I guess the
> call for mtk8250_write(data, 0, MTK_UART_RATE_FIX) should be after the
> pm_runtime_resume_and_get() call.
>
> > > Looking at the 8250_mtk git log, it's runtime PM functions seem to only
> > > currently manage the baud clock so register access should be doable
> > > without runtime PM resume?
> >
> > Actually it only manages the bus clock. The baud clock is simply the system
> > XTAL which is not gateble.
>
> OK
>
> > > > With your earlier patch, it could get through registering the port, and
> > > > the console would show
> > > >
> > > > 11002000.serial: ttyS0 at MMIO 0x11002000 (irq = 240, base_baud =
> > > > 1625000) is a ST16650V2
> > > >
> > > > for the console UART.
> > >
> > > OK
> > >
> > > > Angelo mentioned that we should be using SLEEP_REQ/SLEEP_ACK registers
> > > > in the MTK UART hardware.
> > > >
> > > > I tried reworking it into your patch here, but it causes issues with the
> > > > UART-based Bluetooth on one of my devices. After the UART runtime suspends
> > > > and resumes, something is off and causes the transfers during Bluetooth
> > > > init to become corrupt.
> > > >
> > > > I'll try some more stuff, but the existing code seems timing dependent.
> > > > If I add too many printk statements to the runtime suspend/resume
> > > > callbacks, things seem to work. One time I even ended up with broken
> > > > UARTs but otherwise booted up the system.
> > >
> > > Well another thing that now changes is that we now runtime suspend the
> > > port at the end of the probe. What the 8250_mtk probe was doing earlier
> > > it was leaving the port baud clock enabled, but runtime PM disabled
> > > until mtk8250_do_pm() I guess.
> >
> > I guess that's the biggest difference? Since the *bus* clock gets disabled,
> > any access will hang. Is it enough to just support runtime PM? Or do I have
> > to also have UART_CAP_RPM?
>
> Maybe try changing pm_runtime_put_sync() at the end of the probe to just
> pm_runtime_put_noidle()? Then the driver should be back to where it was
> with clocks enabled but runtime PM suspended.
>
> I don't think you need UART_CAP_RPM right now unless 8250_mtk adds support
> for autosuspend. That stuff will get replaced by the serial_core generic
> PM patch from Andy. I think in it's current form 8250_mtk just gets enabled
> when the port is opened, and disabled when the port is closed. And gets
> disabled for system suspend.
I ended up following 8250_dw's design, which seemed less convoluted.
The original code was waaay too convoluted.
BTW, the Bluetooth breakage seems like a different problem. It works
on v6.4-rc5, but breaks somewhere between that and next, before the
runtime PM series. This particular device has a Qualcomm WiFi/BT chip
with the Bluetooth part going through UART. The btqca reports a bunch
of frame reassembly errors during and after initialization:
Bluetooth: hci0: setting up ROME/QCA6390
Bluetooth: hci0: Frame reassembly failed (-84)
Bluetooth: hci0: QCA Product ID :0x00000008
Bluetooth: hci0: QCA SOC Version :0x00000044
Bluetooth: hci0: QCA ROM Version :0x00000302
Bluetooth: hci0: QCA Patch Version:0x00000111
Bluetooth: hci0: QCA controller version 0x00440302
Bluetooth: hci0: QCA Downloading qca/rampatch_00440302.bin
Bluetooth: hci0: Frame reassembly failed (-84)
Bluetooth: hci0: QCA Downloading qca/nvm_00440302_i2s.bin
Bluetooth: hci0: QCA setup on UART is completed
Bluetooth: hci0: Opcode 0x1002 failed: -110
Bluetooth: hci0: command 0x1002 tx timeout
Bluetooth: hci0: crash the soc to collect controller dump
Bluetooth: hci0: QCA collecting dump of size:196608
Bluetooth: hci0: Frame reassembly failed (-84)
...
Bluetooth: hci0: Frame reassembly failed (-84)
Bluetooth: Received HCI_IBS_WAKE_ACK in tx state 0
Bluetooth: hci0: Frame reassembly failed (-84)
...
Bluetooth: hci0: Frame reassembly failed (-84)
Bluetooth: hci0: Frame reassembly failed (-90)
Bluetooth: hci0: Frame reassembly failed (-84)
...
Bluetooth: hci0: Frame reassembly failed (-84)
Bluetooth: hci0: Injecting HCI hardware error event
However on a different device that has a Realtek WiFi/BT chip,
it doesn't seem to run into errors.
Just putting it out there in case anyone else runs into it.
Thank you for your help on this.
ChenYu
