RE: [PATCH v14 09/12] dmaengine: imx-sdma: remove ERR009165 on i.mx6ul

[Robin Gong <yibin.gong@xxxxxxx>]

On 09/07/21 17:45 Lucas Stach <l.stach@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Am Mittwoch, dem 07.04.2021 um 23:30 +0800 schrieb Robin Gong:
> > ECSPI issue fixed from i.mx6ul at hardware level, no need
> > ERR009165 anymore on those chips such as i.mx8mq.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Robin Gong <yibin.gong@xxxxxxx>
> > Acked-by: Vinod Koul <vkoul@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >  drivers/dma/imx-sdma.c | 26 +++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> >  1 file changed, 25 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/dma/imx-sdma.c b/drivers/dma/imx-sdma.c index
> > 86bd383..af85116 100644
> > --- a/drivers/dma/imx-sdma.c
> > +++ b/drivers/dma/imx-sdma.c
> > @@ -422,6 +422,13 @@ struct sdma_driver_data {
> >  	int num_events;
> >  	struct sdma_script_start_addrs	*script_addrs;
> >  	bool check_ratio;
> > +	/*
> > +	 * ecspi ERR009165 fixed should be done in sdma script
> > +	 * and it has been fixed in soc from i.mx6ul.
> > +	 * please get more information from the below link:
> > +	 *
> https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.n
> xp.com%2Fdocs%2Fen%2Ferrata%2FIMX6DQCE.pdf&amp;data=04%7C01%7C
> yibin.gong%40nxp.com%7Cc950b1bdb6544eda369408d942be35d9%7C686ea
> 1d3bc2b4c6fa92cd99c5c301635%7C0%7C1%7C637614206980361737%7CU
> nknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6
> Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C2000&amp;sdata=6iT6%2FbzJHyWnkhkDynY
> wmK9nn2hgCDy1GyzELeEk9K8%3D&amp;reserved=0
> > +	 */
> > +	bool ecspi_fixed;
> >  };
> >
> >  struct sdma_engine {
> > @@ -542,6 +549,13 @@ static struct sdma_driver_data sdma_imx6q = {
> >  	.script_addrs = &sdma_script_imx6q,
> >  };
> >
> > +static struct sdma_driver_data sdma_imx6ul = {
> > +	.chnenbl0 = SDMA_CHNENBL0_IMX35,
> > +	.num_events = 48,
> > +	.script_addrs = &sdma_script_imx6q,
> > +	.ecspi_fixed = true,
> > +};
> > +
> >  static struct sdma_script_start_addrs sdma_script_imx7d = {
> >  	.ap_2_ap_addr = 644,
> >  	.uart_2_mcu_addr = 819,
> > @@ -575,6 +589,7 @@ static const struct of_device_id sdma_dt_ids[] = {
> >  	{ .compatible = "fsl,imx31-sdma", .data = &sdma_imx31, },
> >  	{ .compatible = "fsl,imx25-sdma", .data = &sdma_imx25, },
> >  	{ .compatible = "fsl,imx7d-sdma", .data = &sdma_imx7d, },
> > +	{ .compatible = "fsl,imx6ul-sdma", .data = &sdma_imx6ul, },
> >  	{ .compatible = "fsl,imx8mq-sdma", .data = &sdma_imx8mq, },
> >  	{ /* sentinel */ }
> >  };
> > @@ -1144,8 +1159,17 @@ static int sdma_config_channel(struct dma_chan
> *chan)
> >  			if (sdmac->peripheral_type == IMX_DMATYPE_ASRC_SP ||
> >  			    sdmac->peripheral_type == IMX_DMATYPE_ASRC)
> >  				sdma_set_watermarklevel_for_p2p(sdmac);
> > -		} else
> > +		} else {
> > +			/*
> > +			 * ERR009165 fixed from i.mx6ul, no errata need,
> > +			 * set bit31 to let sdma script skip the errata.
> > +			 */
> > +			if (sdmac->peripheral_type == IMX_DMATYPE_CSPI &&
> > +			    sdmac->direction == DMA_MEM_TO_DEV &&
> > +			    sdmac->sdma->drvdata->ecspi_fixed)
> > +				__set_bit(31, &sdmac->watermark_level);
> 
> Hm, I don't care much either way, but couldn't we just return the regular
> mcu_2_app script in sdma_get_pc when ecspi_fixed == true? Seems like this
> would be a simpler and more targeted code change.
Yes, return mcu_2_app if ecspi_fixed == true also works, but since sdma firmware
have already been here to fix ERR009165 on most of legacy i.mx6/7/8 chips, so choosing
firmware/ram script to do like ROM/mcu_2_app is okay too since both ram script and rom
script in case of ecspi_fixed are almost same.

> 
> >  			__set_bit(sdmac->event_id0, sdmac->event_mask);
> > +		}
> >
> >  		/* Address */
> >  		sdmac->shp_addr = sdmac->per_address;
>