Re: [PATCHv7 8/8] watchdog: omap_wdt: Convert to use new core extensions

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

 



On 07.05.2015 10:30, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
Hello Timo,

On Thu, May 07, 2015 at 09:42:44AM +0300, Timo Kokkonen wrote:
On 04.05.2015 10:04, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
On Mon, May 04, 2015 at 08:59:03AM +0300, Timo Kokkonen wrote:
Hi, 03.05.2015 21:56, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 02:11:42PM +0300, Timo Kokkonen wrote:
+static int omap_wdt_is_running(struct omap_wdt_dev *wdev)
+{
+	void __iomem *base = wdev->base;
+
+	return readl_relaxed(base + OMAP_WATCHDOG_SPR) == 0x4444;
+}
This isn't reliable. The sequence needed to enable the watchdog is
	writel(0xbbbb, base + OMAP_WATCHDOG_SPR);
	writel(0x4444, base + OMAP_WATCHDOG_SPR);

The sequence to stop is:
	writel(0xaaaa, base + OMAP_WATCHDOG_SPR);
	writel(0x5555, base + OMAP_WATCHDOG_SPR);

But:

barebox@TI AM335x BeagleBone black:/ md 0x44e35048+4
44e35048: 00005555                                           UU..
barebox@TI AM335x BeagleBone black:/ mw 0x44e35048 0x4444
barebox@TI AM335x BeagleBone black:/ md 0x44e35048+4
44e35048: 00004444                                           DD..

So the register contains 0x4444 but the timer doesn't run. So at best
testing for 0x4444 is a good heuristic.

Yeah.. I don't think we can get any better than that. Unless we
start checking the counter register and see whether it really counts
or not, and I think that's a bit overkill.. So I'd say we should be
safe when assuming bootloader is doing things correctly. Although,
we could add a comment to the code that the test may not be 100%
reliable in case the start sequence have not been issued properly.

Thanks for pointing this out!
It doesn't seem to much overhead to do:

	/*
	 * There is no register that tells us if the timer is running,
	 * so we have to resort to sample twice. The minimal frequency
	 * is 256 Hz (32768 Hz prescaled with 2**7).
	 */
	counter1 = readl(base + OMAP_WATCHDOG_CCR);
	mdelay(4);
	counter2 = readl(base + OMAP_WATCHDOG_CCR);
	return counter1 != counter2;

I'd say it's even worth to do:

	cntrl = readl(base + OMAP_WATCHDOG_CNTRL);
	if (cntrl & (1 << 5))
		shift = (cntrl >> 2) & 0x7;
	else
		shift = 0;
	counter1 = readl(base + OMAP_WATCHDOG_CCR);
	udelay(31 << shift);
	counter2 = readl(base + OMAP_WATCHDOG_CCR);
	return counter1 != counter2;

For some bonus points add some defines for the magic constants.

This is save as the OMAP_WATCHDOG_CNTRL doesn't seem to accept reads
s/reads/writes/ in the above line.

while the counter is running. Maybe even this could be used to detect a
running timer?:

Maybe, but you will get a data abort when the HW doesn't accept a
read. How do you recover from that?

Also, it seems that for some reason the watchdog HW is very picky
about which registers can be read in what condition. If I add the
code to read watchdog counter register, I will get a data abort
later at the end of the probe when the watchdog revision is read. I
don't understand why that happens, this does not seem logica. Maybe
it has got something to do with the fact that the watchdog is
stopped? If I can't read the counter register, I can't really
implement the above heuristic.. Any ideas?
Which SoC do you use for your tests? Sounds strange. If you provide me
your wip patch I can take a look.


I tried it on BeagleBone which has am35xx

I tried both approaches and neither were working:

diff --git a/drivers/watchdog/omap_wdt.c b/drivers/watchdog/omap_wdt.c
index f86775e..b929c83 100644
--- a/drivers/watchdog/omap_wdt.c
+++ b/drivers/watchdog/omap_wdt.c
@@ -41,6 +41,7 @@
 #include <linux/slab.h>
 #include <linux/pm_runtime.h>
 #include <linux/platform_data/omap-wd-timer.h>
+#include <linux/delay.h>

 #include "omap_wdt.h"

@@ -81,6 +82,31 @@ static void omap_wdt_reload(struct omap_wdt_dev *wdev)
 static int omap_wdt_is_running(struct omap_wdt_dev *wdev)
 {
 	void __iomem *base = wdev->base;
+	unsigned long cntrl, counter1, counter2, shift;
+       /*
+	* There is no register that tells us if the timer is running,
+	* so we have to resort to sample twice. Use shortest delay
+	* depending on the actual prescaling value.
+	*
+	* Note! If bootloader configured a very large prescaler
+	* value, we might delay up to 4ms here. If that happens, you
+	* are better to fix your bootloader anyway!
+	*/
+
+	/*
+	cntrl = readl_relaxed(base + OMAP_WATCHDOG_CNTRL);
+	if (cntrl & (1 << 5))
+		shift = (cntrl >> 2) & 0x7;
+	else
+		shift = 0;
+	*/
+
+	counter1 = readl_relaxed(base + OMAP_WATCHDOG_CRR);
+	/*udelay(31 << shift);*/
+	msleep(4);
+	counter2 = readl_relaxed(base + OMAP_WATCHDOG_CRR);
+
+	return counter1 != counter2;

 	return readl_relaxed(base + OMAP_WATCHDOG_SPR) == 0x4444;
 }



--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-watchdog" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html




[Index of Archives]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [IETF Annouce]     [Security]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux]     [Linux OMAP]     [Linux MIPS]     [eCos]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]

  Powered by Linux