lists.openwall.net   lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  linux-hardening  linux-cve-announce  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ef63f72a-db03-ef28-a371-e578f351c713@nvidia.com>
Date:   Tue, 16 Jul 2019 12:26:07 -0700
From:   Sowjanya Komatineni <skomatineni@...dia.com>
To:     Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@...il.com>,
        Peter De Schrijver <pdeschrijver@...dia.com>,
        Joseph Lo <josephl@...dia.com>
CC:     <thierry.reding@...il.com>, <jonathanh@...dia.com>,
        <tglx@...utronix.de>, <jason@...edaemon.net>,
        <marc.zyngier@....com>, <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
        <stefan@...er.ch>, <mark.rutland@....com>, <pgaikwad@...dia.com>,
        <sboyd@...nel.org>, <linux-clk@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>, <jckuo@...dia.com>,
        <talho@...dia.com>, <linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <mperttunen@...dia.com>,
        <spatra@...dia.com>, <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V5 11/18] clk: tegra210: Add support for Tegra210 clocks


On 7/16/19 11:43 AM, Dmitry Osipenko wrote:
> 16.07.2019 21:30, Sowjanya Komatineni пишет:
>> On 7/16/19 11:25 AM, Dmitry Osipenko wrote:
>>> 16.07.2019 21:19, Sowjanya Komatineni пишет:
>>>> On 7/16/19 9:50 AM, Sowjanya Komatineni wrote:
>>>>> On 7/16/19 8:00 AM, Dmitry Osipenko wrote:
>>>>>> 16.07.2019 11:06, Peter De Schrijver пишет:
>>>>>>> On Tue, Jul 16, 2019 at 03:24:26PM +0800, Joseph Lo wrote:
>>>>>>>>> OK, Will add to CPUFreq driver...
>>>>>>>>>> The other thing that also need attention is that T124 CPUFreq
>>>>>>>>>> driver
>>>>>>>>>> implicitly relies on DFLL driver to be probed first, which is
>>>>>>>>>> icky.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Should I add check for successful dfll clk register explicitly in
>>>>>>>>> CPUFreq driver probe and defer till dfll clk registers?
>>>>>> Probably you should use the "device links". See [1][2] for the
>>>>>> example.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [1]
>>>>>> https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v5.2.1/source/drivers/gpu/drm/tegra/dc.c#L2383
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [2] https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/driver-api/device_link.html
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Return EPROBE_DEFER instead of EINVAL if device_link_add() fails. And
>>>>>> use of_find_device_by_node() to get the DFLL's device, see [3].
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [3]
>>>>>> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git/tree/drivers/devfreq/tegra20-devfreq.c#n100
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> Will go thru and add...
>>> Looks like I initially confused this case with getting orphaned clock.
>>> I'm now seeing that the DFLL driver registers the clock and then
>>> clk_get(dfll) should be returning EPROBE_DEFER until DFLL driver is
>>> probed, hence everything should be fine as-is and there is no real need
>>> for the 'device link'. Sorry for the confusion!
>>>
>>>>>>>> Sorry, I didn't follow the mail thread. Just regarding the DFLL
>>>>>>>> part.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> As you know it, the DFLL clock is one of the CPU clock sources and
>>>>>>>> integrated with DVFS control logic with the regulator. We will not
>>>>>>>> switch
>>>>>>>> CPU to other clock sources once we switched to DFLL. Because the
>>>>>>>> CPU has
>>>>>>>> been regulated by the DFLL HW with the DVFS table (CVB or OPP table
>>>>>>>> you see
>>>>>>>> in the driver.). We shouldn't reparent it to other sources with
>>>>>>>> unknew
>>>>>>>> freq/volt pair. That's not guaranteed to work. We allow switching to
>>>>>>>> open-loop mode but different sources.
>>>>>> Okay, then the CPUFreq driver will have to enforce DFLL freq to PLLP's
>>>>>> rate before switching to PLLP in order to have a proper CPU voltage.
>>>>> PLLP freq is safe to work for any CPU voltage. So no need to enforce
>>>>> DFLL freq to PLLP rate before changing CCLK_G source to PLLP during
>>>>> suspend
>>>>>
>>>> Sorry, please ignore my above comment. During suspend, need to change
>>>> CCLK_G source to PLLP when dfll is in closed loop mode first and then
>>>> dfll need to be set to open loop.
>>> Okay.
>>>
>>>>>>>> And I don't exactly understand why we need to switch to PLLP in CPU
>>>>>>>> idle
>>>>>>>> driver. Just keep it on CL-DVFS mode all the time.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> In SC7 entry, the dfll suspend function moves it the open-loop
>>>>>>>> mode. That's
>>>>>>>> all. The sc7-entryfirmware will handle the rest of the sequence to
>>>>>>>> turn off
>>>>>>>> the CPU power.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> In SC7 resume, the warmboot code will handle the sequence to turn on
>>>>>>>> regulator and power up the CPU cluster. And leave it on PLL_P. After
>>>>>>>> resuming to the kernel, we re-init DFLL, restore the CPU clock
>>>>>>>> policy (CPU
>>>>>>>> runs on DFLL open-loop mode) and then moving to close-loop mode.
>>>>>> The DFLL is re-inited after switching CCLK to DFLL parent during of
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> early clocks-state restoring by CaR driver. Hence instead of having
>>>>>> odd
>>>>>> hacks in the CaR driver, it is much nicer to have a proper
>>>>>> suspend-resume sequencing of the device drivers. In this case CPUFreq
>>>>>> driver is the driver that enables DFLL and switches CPU to that clock
>>>>>> source, which means that this driver is also should be responsible for
>>>>>> management of the DFLL's state during of suspend/resume process. If
>>>>>> CPUFreq driver disables DFLL during suspend and re-enables it during
>>>>>> resume, then looks like the CaR driver hacks around DFLL are not
>>>>>> needed.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The DFLL part looks good to me. BTW, change the patch subject to
>>>>>>>> "Add
>>>>>>>> suspend-resume support" seems more appropriate to me.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> To clarify this, the sequences for DFLL use are as follows (assuming
>>>>>>> all
>>>>>>> required DFLL hw configuration has been done)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Switch to DFLL:
>>>>>>> 0) Save current parent and frequency
>>>>>>> 1) Program DFLL to open loop mode
>>>>>>> 2) Enable DFLL
>>>>>>> 3) Change cclk_g parent to DFLL
>>>>>>> For OVR regulator:
>>>>>>> 4) Change PWM output pin from tristate to output
>>>>>>> 5) Enable DFLL PWM output
>>>>>>> For I2C regulator:
>>>>>>> 4) Enable DFLL I2C output
>>>>>>> 6) Program DFLL to closed loop mode
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Switch away from DFLL:
>>>>>>> 0) Change cclk_g parent to PLLP so the CPU frequency is ok for any
>>>>>>> vdd_cpu voltage
>>>>>>> 1) Program DFLL to open loop mode
>>>>>>>
>>>> I see during switch away from DFLL (suspend), cclk_g parent is not
>>>> changed to PLLP before changing dfll to open loop mode.
>>>>
>>>> Will add this ...
>>> The CPUFreq driver switches parent to PLLP during the probe, similar
>>> should be done on suspend.
>>>
>>> I'm also wondering if it's always safe to switch to PLLP in the probe.
>>> If CPU is running on a lower freq than PLLP, then some other more
>>> appropriate intermediate parent should be selected.
>>>
>> CPU parents are PLL_X, PLL_P, and dfll. PLL_X always runs at higher rate
>> so switching to PLL_P during CPUFreq probe prior to dfll clock enable
>> should be safe.
> AFAIK, PLLX could run at ~200MHz. There is also a divided output of PLLP
> which CCLKG supports, the PLLP_OUT4.
>
> Probably, realistically, CPU is always running off a fast PLLX during
> boot, but I'm wondering what may happen on KEXEC. I guess ideally
> CPUFreq driver should also have a 'shutdown' callback to teardown DFLL
> on a reboot, but likely that there are other clock-related problems as
> well that may break KEXEC and thus it is not very important at the moment.
>
> [snip]

During bootup CPUG sources from PLL_X. By PLL_P source above I meant 
PLL_P_OUT4.

As per clock policies, PLL_X is always used for high freq like >800Mhz 
and for low frequency it will be sourced from PLLP.


Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ