Messages in this thread Patch in this message |  | | From | Nicolas Boichat <> | Date | Tue, 17 Dec 2019 13:33:52 +0800 | Subject | Re: [PATCH v9 4/9] soc: mediatek: Add multiple step bus protection control |
| |
On Tue, Dec 17, 2019 at 10:51 AM Weiyi Lu <weiyi.lu@mediatek.com> wrote: > > On Mon, 2019-12-16 at 15:21 +0800, Nicolas Boichat wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 10, 2019 at 2:47 PM Weiyi Lu <weiyi.lu@mediatek.com> wrote: > > > > > > Both MT8183 & MT6765 have more control steps of bus protection > > > than previous project. And there add more bus protection registers > > > reside at infracfg & smi-common. Also add new APIs for multiple > > > step bus protection control with more customized arguments. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Weiyi Lu <weiyi.lu@mediatek.com> > > > --- > > > drivers/soc/mediatek/Makefile | 2 +- > > > drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-scpsys-ext.c | 99 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > > drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-scpsys.c | 39 +++++++++---- > > > include/linux/soc/mediatek/scpsys-ext.h | 39 +++++++++++++ > > > 4 files changed, 168 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-) > > > create mode 100644 drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-scpsys-ext.c > > > create mode 100644 include/linux/soc/mediatek/scpsys-ext.h > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/soc/mediatek/Makefile b/drivers/soc/mediatek/Makefile > > > index b017330..b442be9 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/soc/mediatek/Makefile > > > +++ b/drivers/soc/mediatek/Makefile > > > @@ -1,5 +1,5 @@ > > > # SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only > > > obj-$(CONFIG_MTK_CMDQ) += mtk-cmdq-helper.o > > > -obj-$(CONFIG_MTK_INFRACFG) += mtk-infracfg.o > > > +obj-$(CONFIG_MTK_INFRACFG) += mtk-infracfg.o mtk-scpsys-ext.o > > > obj-$(CONFIG_MTK_PMIC_WRAP) += mtk-pmic-wrap.o > > > obj-$(CONFIG_MTK_SCPSYS) += mtk-scpsys.o > > > diff --git a/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-scpsys-ext.c b/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-scpsys-ext.c > > > new file mode 100644 > > > index 0000000..4f1adda > > > --- /dev/null > > > +++ b/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-scpsys-ext.c > > > @@ -0,0 +1,99 @@ > > > +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 > > > +/* > > > + * Copyright (c) 2018 MediaTek Inc. > > > + * Author: Owen Chen <Owen.Chen@mediatek.com> > > > + */ > > > +#include <linux/ktime.h> > > > +#include <linux/mfd/syscon.h> > > > +#include <linux/of_device.h> > > > +#include <linux/regmap.h> > > > +#include <linux/soc/mediatek/scpsys-ext.h> > > > + > > > +#define MTK_POLL_DELAY_US 10 > > > +#define MTK_POLL_TIMEOUT USEC_PER_SEC > > > + > > > +static int set_bus_protection(struct regmap *map, u32 mask, u32 ack_mask, > > > + u32 reg_set, u32 reg_sta, u32 reg_en) > > > +{ > > > + u32 val; > > > + > > > + if (reg_set) > > > + regmap_write(map, reg_set, mask); > > > + else > > > + regmap_update_bits(map, reg_en, mask, mask); > > > > At least for 8183, we never seen to use the reg_set case, can we > > simplify this function? > > > > Actually 6765 will use it and all the other MediaTek chips at least in > near future. > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11042003/
Ok, that's fine then.
> > > + > > > + return regmap_read_poll_timeout(map, reg_sta, > > > + val, (val & ack_mask) == ack_mask, > > > + MTK_POLL_DELAY_US, MTK_POLL_TIMEOUT); > > > > From 8183, I see that you have either: > > 1. mask == ack_mask > > 2. ack_mask == 0 (essentially this skips this test) > > > > Would it be simpler to just skip this test if reg_sta == 0, and always > > assume mask == ack_mask otherwise? > > > > e.g. > > if (reg_sta == 0) > > return 0; > > > > return regmap_read_poll_timeout(map, reg_sta, > > val, (val & mask) == mask, > > MTK_POLL_DELAY_US, MTK_POLL_TIMEOUT); > > > > I'm not sure if you mean ack_mask == 0? > reg_sta would be possible to be 0 because it's a register address > offset.
Right, so maybe "0" is not a good invalid value, or maybe you can have a #define REG_STA_INVALID U32_MAX
And then test for: if (reg_sta == REG_STA_INVALID) return 0;
My point here is that mask and ack_mask are always the same (unless you don't care about reading back the status), so maybe you only need to specify mask?
(but if you need different mask and ack_mask for future chips, feel free to ignore)
> I guess what you'd actually suggest is like below? > > if (ack_mask == 0) > return 0; > > return regmap_read_poll_timeout(map, reg_sta, > val, (val & mask) == mask, > MTK_POLL_DELAY_US, MTK_POLL_TIMEOUT); > > > > > +} > > > + > > > [snip] > > > + > > > +int mtk_scpsys_ext_set_bus_protection(const struct bus_prot *bp_table, > > > + struct regmap *infracfg, struct regmap *smi_common) > > > +{ > > > + int i; > > > + > > > + for (i = 0; i < MAX_STEPS; i++) { > > > + struct regmap *map = NULL; > > > + int ret; > > > + > > > + if (bp_table[i].type == INVALID_TYPE) > > > + continue; > > > > break? (but yes the one below in mtk_scpsys_ext_clear_bus_protection > > has to be continue). > > > > Thanks. I'll fix in next version. > > > > + else if (bp_table[i].type == IFR_TYPE) > > > + map = infracfg; > > > + else if (bp_table[i].type == SMI_TYPE) > > > + map = smi_common; > > > + > > > + ret = set_bus_protection(map, > > > + bp_table[i].mask, bp_table[i].mask, > > > + bp_table[i].set_ofs, bp_table[i].sta_ofs, > > > + bp_table[i].en_ofs); > > > + > > > + if (ret) > > > + return ret; > > > + } > > > + > > > + return 0; > > > +} > > > + > > > +int mtk_scpsys_ext_clear_bus_protection(const struct bus_prot *bp_table, > > > + struct regmap *infracfg, struct regmap *smi_common) > > > +{ > > > + int i; > > > + > > > + for (i = MAX_STEPS - 1; i >= 0; i--) { > > > + struct regmap *map = NULL; > > > + int ret; > > > + > > > + if (bp_table[i].type == INVALID_TYPE) > > > + continue; > > > + else if (bp_table[i].type == IFR_TYPE) > > > + map = infracfg; > > > + else if (bp_table[i].type == SMI_TYPE) > > > + map = smi_common; > > > + > > > + ret = clear_bus_protection(map, > > > + bp_table[i].mask, bp_table[i].clr_ack_mask, > > > + bp_table[i].clr_ofs, bp_table[i].sta_ofs, > > > + bp_table[i].en_ofs); > > > + > > > + if (ret) > > > + return ret; > > > + } > > > + > > > + return 0; > > > +} > > > diff --git a/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-scpsys.c b/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-scpsys.c > > > index 915d635..466bb749 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-scpsys.c > > > +++ b/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-scpsys.c > > > @@ -12,6 +12,7 @@ > > > #include <linux/pm_domain.h> > > > #include <linux/regulator/consumer.h> > > > #include <linux/soc/mediatek/infracfg.h> > > > +#include <linux/soc/mediatek/scpsys-ext.h> > > > > > > #include <dt-bindings/power/mt2701-power.h> > > > #include <dt-bindings/power/mt2712-power.h> > > > @@ -120,6 +121,7 @@ enum clk_id { > > > * @basic_clk_id: provide the same purpose with field "clk_id" > > > * by declaring basic clock prefix name rather than clk_id. > > > * @caps: The flag for active wake-up action. > > > + * @bp_table: The mask table for multiple step bus protection. > > > */ > > > struct scp_domain_data { > > > const char *name; > > > @@ -131,6 +133,7 @@ struct scp_domain_data { > > > enum clk_id clk_id[MAX_CLKS]; > > > const char *basic_clk_id[MAX_CLKS]; > > > u8 caps; > > > + struct bus_prot bp_table[MAX_STEPS]; > > > > As with the previous patch, I'm not a big fan of having 2 approaches > > for something similar (bus_prot_mask vs bp_table), can we define a > > simple macro for this? > > e.g.: > > .bp_table = BUS_PROT_SINGLE(mask) > > Agree! I'll fix it. > >
|  |