[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <107dc1d3-05c6-61be-b82c-197f0c43cdba@ti.com>
Date: Mon, 8 Jun 2020 18:10:39 -0500
From: Suman Anna <s-anna@...com>
To: Paul Cercueil <paul@...pouillou.net>
CC: Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>,
Ohad Ben-Cohen <ohad@...ery.com>,
Arnaud Pouliquen <arnaud.pouliquen@...com>, <od@...c.me>,
<linux-remoteproc@...r.kernel.org>, <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Tero Kristo <t-kristo@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 3/5] remoteproc: Add support for runtime PM
Hi Paul,
On 6/8/20 5:46 PM, Paul Cercueil wrote:
> Hi Suman,
>
>>>> On 5/15/20 5:43 AM, Paul Cercueil wrote:
>>>>> Call pm_runtime_get_sync() before the firmware is loaded, and
>>>>> pm_runtime_put() after the remote processor has been stopped.
>>>>>
>>>>> Even though the remoteproc device has no PM callbacks, this allows the
>>>>> parent device's PM callbacks to be properly called.
>>>>
>>>> I see this patch staged now for 5.8, and the latest -next branch
>>>> has broken the pm-runtime autosuspend feature we have in the
>>>> OMAP remoteproc driver. See commit 5f31b232c674 ("remoteproc/omap:
>>>> Add support for runtime auto-suspend/resume").
>>>>
>>>> What was the original purpose of this patch, because there can be
>>>> differing backends across different SoCs.
>>>
>>> Did you try pm_suspend_ignore_children()? It looks like it was made
>>> for your use-case.
>>
>> Sorry for the delay in getting back. So, using
>> pm_suspend_ignore_children() does fix my current issue.
>>
>> But I still fail to see the original purpose of this patch in the
>> remoteproc core especially given that the core itself does not have
>> any callbacks. If the sole intention was to call the parent pdev's
>> callbacks, then I feel that state-machine is better managed within
>> that particular platform driver itself, as the sequencing/device
>> management can vary with different platform drivers.
>
> The problem is that with Ingenic SoCs some clocks must be enabled in
> order to load the firmware, and the core doesn't give you an option to
> register a callback to be called before loading it.
Yep, I have similar usage in one of my remoteproc drivers (see
keystone_remoteproc.c), and I think this all stems from the need to
use/support loading into a processor's internal memories. My driver does
leverage the pm-clks backend plugged into pm_runtime, so you won't see
explicit calls on the clocks.
I guess the question is what exact PM features you are looking for with
the Ingenic SoC. I do see you are using pm_runtime autosuspend, and your
callbacks are managing the clocks, but reset is managed only in start/stop.
> The first version of
> my patchset added .prepare/.unprepare callbacks to the struct rproc_ops,
> but the feedback from the maintainers was that I should do it via
> runtime PM. However, it was not possible to keep it contained in the
> driver, since again the core doesn't provide a "prepare" callback, so no
> place to call pm_runtime_get_sync().
FWIW, the .prepare/.unprepare callbacks is actually now part of the
rproc core. Looks like multiple developers had a need for this, and this
functionality went in at the same time as your driver :). Not sure if
you looked up the prior patches, I leveraged the patch that Loic had
submitted a long-time ago, and a revised version of it is now part of
5.8-rc1.
So we settled with having runtime
> PM in the core without callbacks, which will trigger the runtime PM
> callbacks of the driver at the right moment.
Looks like we can do some cleanup on the Ingenic SoC driver depending on
the features you want.
regards
Suman
>
> Sorry if that caused you trouble.
>
> Cheers,
> -Paul
>>>>
>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Paul Cercueil <paul@...pouillou.net>
>>>>> ---
>>>>>
>>>>> Notes:
>>>>> v2-v4: No change
>>>>> v5: Move calls to prepare/unprepare to
>>>>> rproc_fw_boot/rproc_shutdown
>>>>> v6: Instead of prepare/unprepare callbacks, use PM runtime
>>>>> callbacks
>>>>> v7: Check return value of pm_runtime_get_sync()
>>>>>
>>>>> drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c | 17 ++++++++++++++++-
>>>>> 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
>>>>> b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
>>>>> index a7f96bc98406..e33d1ef27981 100644
>>>>> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
>>>>> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
>>>>> @@ -29,6 +29,7 @@
>>>>> #include <linux/devcoredump.h>
>>>>> #include <linux/rculist.h>
>>>>> #include <linux/remoteproc.h>
>>>>> +#include <linux/pm_runtime.h>
>>>>> #include <linux/iommu.h>
>>>>> #include <linux/idr.h>
>>>>> #include <linux/elf.h>
>>>>> @@ -1382,6 +1383,12 @@ static int rproc_fw_boot(struct rproc
>>>>> *rproc, const struct firmware *fw)
>>>>> if (ret)
>>>>> return ret;
>>>>> + ret = pm_runtime_get_sync(dev);
>>>>> + if (ret < 0) {
>>>>> + dev_err(dev, "pm_runtime_get_sync failed: %d\n", ret);
>>>>> + return ret;
>>>>> + }
>>>>> +
>>>>> dev_info(dev, "Booting fw image %s, size %zd\n", name,
>>>>> fw->size);
>>>>> /*
>>>>> @@ -1391,7 +1398,7 @@ static int rproc_fw_boot(struct rproc
>>>>> *rproc, const struct firmware *fw)
>>>>> ret = rproc_enable_iommu(rproc);
>>>>> if (ret) {
>>>>> dev_err(dev, "can't enable iommu: %d\n", ret);
>>>>> - return ret;
>>>>> + goto put_pm_runtime;
>>>>> }
>>>>> rproc->bootaddr = rproc_get_boot_addr(rproc, fw);
>>>>> @@ -1435,6 +1442,8 @@ static int rproc_fw_boot(struct rproc
>>>>> *rproc, const struct firmware *fw)
>>>>> rproc->table_ptr = NULL;
>>>>> disable_iommu:
>>>>> rproc_disable_iommu(rproc);
>>>>> +put_pm_runtime:
>>>>> + pm_runtime_put(dev);
>>>>> return ret;
>>>>> }
>>>>> @@ -1840,6 +1849,8 @@ void rproc_shutdown(struct rproc *rproc)
>>>>> rproc_disable_iommu(rproc);
>>>>> + pm_runtime_put(dev);
>>>>> +
>>>>> /* Free the copy of the resource table */
>>>>> kfree(rproc->cached_table);
>>>>> rproc->cached_table = NULL;
>>>>> @@ -2118,6 +2129,9 @@ struct rproc *rproc_alloc(struct device
>>>>> *dev, const char *name,
>>>>> rproc->state = RPROC_OFFLINE;
>>>>> + pm_runtime_no_callbacks(&rproc->dev);
>>>>> + pm_runtime_enable(&rproc->dev);
>>>>> +
>>>>> return rproc;
>>>>> }
>>>>> EXPORT_SYMBOL(rproc_alloc);
>>>>> @@ -2133,6 +2147,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(rproc_alloc);
>>>>> */
>>>>> void rproc_free(struct rproc *rproc)
>>>>> {
>>>>> + pm_runtime_disable(&rproc->dev);
>>>>> put_device(&rproc->dev);
>>>>> }
>>>>> EXPORT_SYMBOL(rproc_free);
>>>>>
>>>>
>
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists