Message-ID: <539AB4E4.6050408@ti.com>
Date:	Fri, 13 Jun 2014 11:23:00 +0300
From:	Roger Quadros <rogerq@...com>
To:	"Gupta, Pekon" <pekon@...com>, Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>
CC:	"dwmw2@...radead.org" <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
	"computersforpeace@...il.com" <computersforpeace@...il.com>,
	"kyungmin.park@...sung.com" <kyungmin.park@...sung.com>,
	"ezequiel.garcia@...e-electrons.com" 
	<ezequiel.garcia@...e-electrons.com>,
	"javier@...hile0.org" <javier@...hile0.org>,
	"Nori, Sekhar" <nsekhar@...com>,
	"linux-omap@...r.kernel.org" <linux-omap@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org>,
	"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/36] mtd: nand: omap: Move IRQ handling from GPMC to
 NAND driver

On 06/13/2014 11:13 AM, Gupta, Pekon wrote:
> 
>> From: Tony Lindgren [mailto:tony@...mide.com]
>>> * Roger Quadros <rogerq@...com> [140613 00:40]:
>>>> On 06/13/2014 10:18 AM, Tony Lindgren wrote:
>>>>> * Roger Quadros <rogerq@...com> [140611 01:58]:
>>>>> Since the Interrupt Events are used only by the NAND driver,
>>>>> there is no point in managing the Interrupt registers
>>>>> in the GPMC driver and complicating it with irqchip modeling.
>>>>>
>>>>> Let's manage the interrupt registers directly in the NAND driver
>>>>> and get rid of irqchip model from GPMC driver.
>>>>>
>>>>> Get rid of IRQ commands and unused commands from gpmc_configure() in
>>>>> the GPMC driver.
>>>>
>>>> This seems like a step backward to me. The GPMC interrupt enable
>>>> register can do edge detection on the wait pins, how is that
>>>> limited to NAND?
>>>
>>> OK. But wait pin edge detection was not yet being used and I couldn't
>>> think of how it would ever be used. Any ideas?
>>
>> Maybe to wake-up the system on bus activity or something?
>>
> Sorry, I wasn't able to review this series.
> But just as pointer, GPMC driver was used for interfacing many
> non-memory devices like Ethernet (smc91x) and in past GPMC has been
> proved to work with camera devices too, but that's wasn't mainlined.
> So keeping IRQ and few other things in GPMC driver is helpful.
> 

On further study it seems that the wait pin edge detection is only used in the NAND controller use case.
see section 10.1.5.14.2.2 Ready Pin Monitored by Hardware Interrupt

For memory devices, no software wait pin intervention is necessary and doesn't even make sense.

So I don't agree on managing the IRQSTATUS and IRQENABLE register in the GPMC driver. It is adding unnecessary complexity. I don't mind having a wrapper around it though like the other nand registers.

To be frank, I think it is cleaner if the NAND driver directly accesses the NAND registers.
I don't see why we should make things complicated just because the hardware designers didn't create a clear register split between GPMC and NAND.

Only the GPMC_CONFIG register needs to remain with the GPMC driver.

cheers,
-roger

> 
> 
> 
>>>> Further, let's not start mixing GPMC hardware module register
>>>> access with the NAND driver register access. They can be clocked
>>>> separately. And bugs in the NAND driver can cause issues in other
>>>> GPMC using drivers.
>>>
>>> I understood that NAND controller is integrated into the GPMC module and they are clocked
>>> the same. Not sure why the hardware designers would keep the registers so closely knit.
>>
>> Yeah. Maybe regmap could provide some abstraction to the the
>> NAND registers.
>>
> As you mentioned, GPMC has two set of registers:
> (a) Chip-select registers (CONFIGx_cs) for device specific parameters
>  (like device-width, signal-timings, etc) which are statically programmed
> during probe or via DT.
> (b) ECC registers which are continuously reconfigured based on
>  ECC engine.
> 
> *Ideal Scenario*
> NAND driver should be considered equivalent to protocol driver,
> Therefore ideally it should use only those registers which are
> specific to NAND (b).
> 
> *Actual Scenario*
> But most NAND device today are ONFI compliant and they have
> almost all device parameters like device-width, signal-timings
> burned on-die in an ONFI page. These values are read back from
> NAND device during device_probe() and then re-configured back
> Chip-select registers (a).
> Hence NAND driver needs access of both (a) and (b), which is why
> You need to export complete GPMC register set to NAND driver.
> However this is not the case and has been discussed earlier too..
> 
> http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-mtd/2013-October/049284.html
> http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-mtd/2013-October/049347.html
> (Just pointing out my version of history, would be good to read the
> entire discussion. But the summary was that we need to re-configure
> some GPMC chip-select registers (a) based on probe done in
> NAND driver. So we need all GPMC registers exposed to NAND driver).
> 
> 
> 
> 
>>> FYI. memory/ti-amif.c and mtd/nand/davinci_nand.c share the AMIF register space in the
>>> same way. I thought it'd be nice to be consistent across TI drivers.
>>
>> Probably they did not yet learn the problems caused by it :)
>>
> I havn't reviewed the ti-amif.c driver completely but I think they too
> configure device signal timing statically based on DT. But as per
> today this is frowned upon because:
> 
> (1) Its difficult for layman user to decipher NAND signal timings
> from datasheet and then convert it into controller understandable DT
> 
> (2) ONFI parameter page on NAND has these timings specified
> on-die itself, and these timings are characterized for best performance
> so NAND driver should re-configure these timings after probe.
> Refer below mail from '<Rob Herring> robherring2@...il.com'
> http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-mtd/2014-April/053488.html
> 
> 
> Considering all these details, please re-review the changes you plan
> for GPMC driver.
> 
> with regards, pekon
> 

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists