linux-kernel - Re: [RFCv1 5/5] arm64/ARM: configs: Change CONFIG_PWM

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: <CANAwSgRwLp02u1_u6oX_dXAueb2nASL_iiMmAt1Q3t9JfxiDPg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 18 Oct 2019 20:51:50 +0530
From:   Anand Moon <linux.amoon@...il.com>
To:     Neil Armstrong <narmstrong@...libre.com>
Cc:     Jerome Brunet <jbrunet@...libre.com>,
        Martin Blumenstingl <martin.blumenstingl@...glemail.com>,
        Kevin Hilman <khilman@...libre.com>,
        devicetree <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        linux-amlogic@...ts.infradead.org,
        Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFCv1 5/5] arm64/ARM: configs: Change CONFIG_PWM_MESON from m to y

Hi Neil,

On Fri, 18 Oct 2019 at 19:43, Neil Armstrong <narmstrong@...libre.com> wrote:
>
> On 18/10/2019 16:04, Anand Moon wrote:
> > Hi Jerome / Neil / Martin,
> >
> > On Wed, 9 Oct 2019 at 17:34, Jerome Brunet <jbrunet@...libre.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> On Wed 09 Oct 2019 at 10:48, Anand Moon <linux.amoon@...il.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Kernel command line: console=ttyAML0,115200n8
> >>> root=PARTUUID=45d7d61e-01 rw rootwait
> >>> earlyprintk=serial,ttyAML0,115200 initcall_debug printk.time=y
> >>>
> >>> [0] https://pastebin.com/eBgJrSKe
> >>>
> >>>> you can also try the command line parameter "clk_ignore_unused" (it's
> >>>> just a gut feeling: maybe a "critical" clock is being disabled because
> >>>> it's not wired up correctly).
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> It look like some clk issue after I added the *clk_ignore_unused* to
> >>> kernel command line
> >>> it booted further to login prompt and cpufreq DVFS seem to be loaded.
> >>> So I could conclude this is clk issue.below is the boot log
> >>>
> >>> Kernel command line: console=ttyAML0,115200n8
> >>> root=PARTUUID=45d7d61e-01 rw rootwait
> >>> earlyprintk=serial,ttyAML0,115200 initcall_debug printk.time=y
> >>> clk_ignore_unused
> >>>
> >>> [1] https://pastebin.com/Nsk0wZQJ
> >>>
> >>
> >> Next step it to try narrow down the clock causing the issue.
> >> Remove clk_ignore_unused from the command line and add CLK_INGORE_UNUSED
> >> to the flag of some clocks your clock controller (g12a I think) until
> >>
> >> The peripheral clock gates already have this flag (something we should
> >> fix someday) so don't bother looking there.
> >>
> >> Most likely the source of the pwm is getting disabled between the
> >> late_init call and the probe of the PWM module. Since the pwm is already
> >> active (w/o a driver), gating the clock source shuts dowm the power to
> >> the cores.
> >>
> >> Looking a the possible inputs in pwm driver, I'd bet on fdiv4.
> >>
> >
> > I had give this above steps a try but with little success.
> > I am still looking into this much close.
> >
> > Well I am not the expert in clk or bus configuration.
> > but after looking into the datasheet of for clk configuration
> > I found some bus are not configured correctly.
> >
> > As per Amlogic's kernel S922X (Hardkernel)
> > below link share the bus controller.
> >
> > [0] https://github.com/hardkernel/linux/blob/odroidn2-4.9.y/arch/arm64/boot/dts/amlogic/mesong12b.dtsi#L295-L315
> >
> > looking in to current dts changes it looks bit wrong to me.
> >
> > *As per 6.1 Memory Map*
> > apb_efuse: bus@...00  --> apb_efuse: bus@...30000
> > periphs: bus@...00    --> periphs: bus@...34400
> > dmc: bus@...00        --> dmc: bus@...38000
> > hiu: bus@...00        --> hiu: bus@...3c0000
>
> If these was wrong, the drivers simply won't work, at all
>
> >
> > Also the order of these is not correct.
>
> The order is correct, actually
>
> >
> > Down the line in the datasheet some of the interrupt GIC bit are not
> > mapped correctly for example.
> >
> > *As per 6.9.2 Interrupt Control Source*
> > 223 SD_EMMC_C
> > 222 SD_EMMC_B
> > 221 SD_EMMC_A
>
> There is an offset between the doc and the actual GIC_SPI line,
> they start the datasheet numbers from the GIC_PPI numbers (+32).
>
Ok. Thanks.

> Neil
>
Thanks for answering my query.

Best Regards
-Anand