linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: mediatek: Raise proc and sram max voltage for MT7622/7623

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]
Date:   Mon, 5 Dec 2022 06:24:34 +0000
From:   Jia-wei Chang (張佳偉) 
        <Jia-wei.Chang@...iatek.com>
To:     Sean Wang <Sean.Wang@...iatek.com>,
        "viresh.kumar@...aro.org" <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
        "angelogioacchino.delregno@...labora.com" 
        <angelogioacchino.delregno@...labora.com>,
        "vincent@...temli.org" <vincent@...temli.org>
CC:     "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org" 
        <linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org>,
        "linux-pm@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
        "frank-w@...lic-files.de" <frank-w@...lic-files.de>,
        "linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        "matthias.bgg@...il.com" <matthias.bgg@...il.com>,
        "rafael@...nel.org" <rafael@...nel.org>,
        "daniel@...rotopia.org" <daniel@...rotopia.org>,
        Rex-BC Chen (陳柏辰) 
        <Rex-BC.Chen@...iatek.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: mediatek: Raise proc and sram max voltage for
 MT7622/7623

Mail loop Sean.Wang for MT7622 cpufreq.


On Fri, 2022-12-02 at 13:37 +0100, Nick wrote:
> It now starts, however, with a lot of those messages (I applied the 
> patch to linux/master and not to linux-next, because next is
> currently 
> not compiling anymore for me):
> 
> > [   10.777041] cpufreq: __target_index: Failed to change cpu 
> > frequency: -22

Hi Nick,

The errno occurs when cpufreq platform driver attempts to do
mtk_cpufreq_voltage_tracking() but it is not able to accomplish voltage
scaling within a certain of times, vtrack_max.

It will needs further debug message to figure it out.

> > [   10.791577] cpu cpu0: cpu0: failed to scale up voltage!
> 
> The complete log:
> 
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://gist.githubusercontent.com/PolynomialDivision/267c83c7a21a359cbb4e8d99d0303201/raw/28d3568a26634bebef2d91ebe37fc5f76ae58add/mt7622-patch-cpufreq.log__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!msWJync96Qc5bvMB-5gCpepj-5zYWizO_98rjuaLWc7fSBNSSpPMPvZqq1mprBgRq11GAqYvf4hUzwZkX_IhM6k0$ 
> 

May I know if this failure log can be 100 % reproduced on your
platform?

Thanks.

>  
> 
> Bests
> Nick
> 
> On 12/2/22 10:52, AngeloGioacchino Del Regno wrote:
> > During the addition of SRAM voltage tracking for CCI scaling, this
> > driver got some voltage limits set for the vtrack algorithm: these
> > were moved to platform data first, then enforced in a later commit
> > 6a17b3876bc8 ("cpufreq: mediatek: Refine
> > mtk_cpufreq_voltage_tracking()")
> > using these as max values for the regulator_set_voltage() calls.
> > 
> > In this case, the vsram/vproc constraints for MT7622 and MT7623
> > were supposed to be the same as MT2701 (and a number of other
> > SoCs),
> > but that turned out to be a mistake because the aforementioned two
> > SoCs' maximum voltage for both VPROC and VPROC_SRAM is 1.36V.
> > 
> > Fix that by adding new platform data for MT7622/7623 declaring the
> > right {proc,sram}_max_volt parameter.
> > 
> > Fixes: ead858bd128d ("cpufreq: mediatek: Move voltage limits to
> > platform data")
> > Fixes: 6a17b3876bc8 ("cpufreq: mediatek: Refine
> > mtk_cpufreq_voltage_tracking()")
> > Signed-off-by: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno <
> > angelogioacchino.delregno@...labora.com>
> > ---
> >   drivers/cpufreq/mediatek-cpufreq.c | 13 +++++++++++--
> >   1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/mediatek-cpufreq.c
> > b/drivers/cpufreq/mediatek-cpufreq.c
> > index 7f2680bc9a0f..f9a9f08c75c4 100644
> > --- a/drivers/cpufreq/mediatek-cpufreq.c
> > +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/mediatek-cpufreq.c
> > @@ -695,6 +695,15 @@ static const struct mtk_cpufreq_platform_data
> > mt2701_platform_data = {
> >   	.ccifreq_supported = false,
> >   };
> >   
> > +static const struct mtk_cpufreq_platform_data mt7622_platform_data
> > = {
> > +	.min_volt_shift = 100000,
> > +	.max_volt_shift = 200000,
> > +	.proc_max_volt = 1360000,
> > +	.sram_min_volt = 0,
> > +	.sram_max_volt = 1360000,
> > +	.ccifreq_supported = false,
> > +};
> > +
> >   static const struct mtk_cpufreq_platform_data
> > mt8183_platform_data = {
> >   	.min_volt_shift = 100000,
> >   	.max_volt_shift = 200000,
> > @@ -717,8 +726,8 @@ static const struct mtk_cpufreq_platform_data
> > mt8186_platform_data = {
> >   static const struct of_device_id mtk_cpufreq_machines[]
> > __initconst = {
> >   	{ .compatible = "mediatek,mt2701", .data =
> > &mt2701_platform_data },
> >   	{ .compatible = "mediatek,mt2712", .data =
> > &mt2701_platform_data },
> > -	{ .compatible = "mediatek,mt7622", .data =
> > &mt2701_platform_data },
> > -	{ .compatible = "mediatek,mt7623", .data =
> > &mt2701_platform_data },
> > +	{ .compatible = "mediatek,mt7622", .data =
> > &mt7622_platform_data },
> > +	{ .compatible = "mediatek,mt7623", .data =
> > &mt7622_platform_data },
> >   	{ .compatible = "mediatek,mt8167", .data =
> > &mt2701_platform_data },
> >   	{ .compatible = "mediatek,mt817x", .data =
> > &mt2701_platform_data },
> >   	{ .compatible = "mediatek,mt8173", .data =
> > &mt2701_platform_data },

Hi Angelo,

Thanks for your help.

I also found the similar problem that platforms using incorrect
vsram/vproc constraint platform data.  They are MT8167 and MT8516 which
refer to mt8516.dtsi and the max voltage value of vproc is 1300 mV.

Can you help to fix the correct platform data for MT8167 and MT8516 as
well?

Thanks.