[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAPDyKFrNprXpdQBEzezyOJg6NJ8LLarZQV_mnQn5QyCrNmsRUw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2023 12:23:21 +0200
From: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>
To: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>
Cc: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno
<angelogioacchino.delregno@...labora.com>,
Andy Gross <agross@...nel.org>,
Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
Viresh Kumar <vireshk@...nel.org>, Nishanth Menon <nm@...com>,
Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>,
Niklas Cassel <nks@...wful.org>,
Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
Robert Marko <robimarko@...il.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
Jeffrey Hugo <quic_jhugo@...cinc.com>,
Marijn Suijten <marijn.suijten@...ainline.org>,
AngeloGioacchino Del Regno
<angelogioacchino.delregno@...ainline.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v14 8/9] soc: qcom: Add support for Core Power Reduction
v3, v4 and Hardened
On Mon, 28 Aug 2023 at 13:42, Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org> wrote:
>
> From: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno <angelogioacchino.delregno@...ainline.org>
>
> This commit introduces a new driver, based on the one for cpr v1,
> to enable support for the newer Qualcomm Core Power Reduction
> hardware, known downstream as CPR3, CPR4 and CPRh, and support
> for MSM8998 and SDM630 CPU power reduction.
>
> In these new versions of the hardware, support for various new
> features was introduced, including voltage reduction for the GPU,
> security hardening and a new way of controlling CPU DVFS,
> consisting in internal communication between microcontrollers,
> specifically the CPR-Hardened and the Operating State Manager.
>
> The CPR v3, v4 and CPRh are present in a broad range of SoCs,
> from the mid-range to the high end ones including, but not limited
> to, MSM8953/8996/8998, SDM630/636/660/845.
>
> Signed-off-by: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno <angelogioacchino.delregno@...ainline.org>
> [Konrad: rebase, apply review comments]
> Tested-by: Jeffrey Hugo <quic_jhugo@...cinc.com>
> Signed-off-by: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>
> ---
[...]
> +
> +static unsigned int cpr_get_performance_state(struct generic_pm_domain *genpd,
> + struct dev_pm_opp *opp)
> +{
> + return dev_pm_opp_get_level(opp);
> +}
The OPP core doesn't use pm_genpd_opp_to_performance_state() anymore,
but defaults to use dev_pm_opp_get_level(). Meaning that you can drop
the above function.
I am planning to remove pm_genpd_opp_to_performance_state(), in the
next cycle, as it's no longer needed.
> +
> +static int cpr_power_off(struct generic_pm_domain *domain)
> +{
> + struct cpr_thread *thread = container_of(domain, struct cpr_thread, pd);
> +
> + return cpr_disable(thread);
> +}
> +
> +static int cpr_power_on(struct generic_pm_domain *domain)
> +{
> + struct cpr_thread *thread = container_of(domain, struct cpr_thread, pd);
> +
> + return cpr_enable(thread);
> +}
> +
> +static void cpr_pd_detach_dev(struct generic_pm_domain *domain,
> + struct device *dev)
> +{
> + struct cpr_thread *thread = container_of(domain, struct cpr_thread, pd);
> + struct cpr_drv *drv = thread->drv;
> +
> + mutex_lock(&drv->lock);
> +
> + dev_dbg(drv->dev, "detach callback for: %s\n", dev_name(dev));
> + thread->attached_cpu_dev = NULL;
> +
> + mutex_unlock(&drv->lock);
Don't you need to do some additional cleanup here? Like calling
dev_pm_opp_of_remove_table() for example?
> +}
> +
> +static int cpr_pd_attach_dev(struct generic_pm_domain *domain,
> + struct device *dev)
> +{
> + struct cpr_thread *thread = container_of(domain, struct cpr_thread, pd);
> + struct cpr_drv *drv = thread->drv;
> + const struct acc_desc *acc_desc = drv->acc_desc;
> + bool cprh_opp_remove_table = false;
> + int ret = 0;
> +
> + mutex_lock(&drv->lock);
> +
> + dev_dbg(drv->dev, "attach callback for: %s\n", dev_name(dev));
> +
> + /*
> + * This driver only supports scaling voltage for a CPU cluster
> + * where all CPUs in the cluster share a single regulator.
> + * Therefore, save the struct device pointer only for the first
> + * CPU device that gets attached. There is no need to do any
> + * additional initialization when further CPUs get attached.
> + * This is not an error condition.
> + */
> + if (thread->attached_cpu_dev)
> + goto unlock;
> +
> + /*
> + * cpr_scale_voltage() requires the direction (if we are changing
> + * to a higher or lower OPP). The first time
> + * cpr_set_performance_state() is called, there is no previous
> + * performance state defined. Therefore, we call
> + * cpr_find_initial_corner() that gets the CPU clock frequency
> + * set by the bootloader, so that we can determine the direction
> + * the first time cpr_set_performance_state() is called.
> + */
> + thread->cpu_clk = devm_clk_get(dev, NULL);
> + if (drv->desc->cpr_type < CTRL_TYPE_CPRH && IS_ERR(thread->cpu_clk)) {
> + ret = PTR_ERR(thread->cpu_clk);
> + if (ret != -EPROBE_DEFER)
> + dev_err(drv->dev, "could not get cpu clk: %d\n", ret);
> + goto unlock;
> + }
> + thread->attached_cpu_dev = dev;
> +
> + /*
> + * We are exporting the APM and MEM-ACC thresholds to the caller;
> + * while APM is necessary in the CPU CPR case, MEM-ACC may not be,
> + * depending on the SoC and on fuses.
> + * Initialize both to an invalid value, so that the caller can check
> + * if they got calculated or read from fuses in this driver.
> + */
> + thread->ext_data.apm_threshold_uV = -1;
> + thread->ext_data.mem_acc_threshold_uV = -1;
> + dev_set_drvdata(thread->attached_cpu_dev, &thread->ext_data);
> +
> + dev_dbg(drv->dev, "using cpu clk from: %s\n",
> + dev_name(thread->attached_cpu_dev));
> +
> + /*
> + * Everything related to (virtual) corners has to be initialized
> + * here, when attaching to the power domain, since we need to know
> + * the maximum frequency for each fuse corner, and this is only
> + * available after the cpufreq driver has attached to us.
> + * The reason for this is that we need to know the highest
> + * frequency associated with each fuse corner.
> + */
> + ret = dev_pm_opp_get_opp_count(&thread->pd.dev);
> + if (ret < 0) {
> + dev_err(drv->dev, "could not get OPP count\n");
> + thread->attached_cpu_dev = NULL;
> + goto unlock;
> + }
> + thread->num_corners = ret;
> +
> + thread->corners = devm_kcalloc(drv->dev,
> + thread->num_corners +
> + drv->extra_corners,
> + sizeof(*thread->corners),
> + GFP_KERNEL);
> + if (!thread->corners) {
> + ret = -ENOMEM;
> + goto unlock;
> + }
> +
> + /*
> + * If we are on CPR-Hardened we have to make sure that the attached
> + * device has a OPP table installed, as we're going to modify it here
> + * with our calculations based on qfprom values.
> + */
> + if (drv->desc->cpr_type == CTRL_TYPE_CPRH) {
> + ret = dev_pm_opp_of_add_table(dev);
> + if (ret && ret != -EEXIST) {
> + dev_err(drv->dev, "Cannot add table: %d\n", ret);
> + goto unlock;
> + }
> + cprh_opp_remove_table = true;
> + }
> +
> + ret = cpr3_corner_init(thread);
> + if (ret)
> + goto exit;
> +
> + if (drv->desc->cpr_type < CTRL_TYPE_CPRH) {
> + ret = cpr3_find_initial_corner(thread);
> + if (ret)
> + goto exit;
> +
> + if (acc_desc->config)
> + regmap_multi_reg_write(drv->tcsr, acc_desc->config,
> + acc_desc->num_regs_per_fuse);
> +
> + /* Enable ACC if required */
> + if (acc_desc->enable_mask)
> + regmap_update_bits(drv->tcsr, acc_desc->enable_reg,
> + acc_desc->enable_mask,
> + acc_desc->enable_mask);
> + }
> + dev_info(drv->dev, "thread %d initialized with %u OPPs\n",
> + thread->id, thread->num_corners);
> +exit:
> + /*
> + * If we are on CPRh and we reached an error condition, we installed
> + * the OPP table but we haven't done any setup on it, nor we ever will.
> + * In order to leave a clean state, remove the table.
> + */
> + if (ret && cprh_opp_remove_table)
> + dev_pm_opp_of_remove_table(thread->attached_cpu_dev);
> +unlock:
> + mutex_unlock(&drv->lock);
> +
> + return ret;
> +}
[...]
> +/**
> + * cpr_thread_init() - Initialize CPR thread related parameters
> + * @drv: Main driver structure
> + * @tid: Thread ID
> + *
> + * Return: Zero for success, negative number on error
> + */
> +static int cpr_thread_init(struct cpr_drv *drv, int tid)
> +{
> + const struct cpr_desc *desc = drv->desc;
> + const struct cpr_thread_desc *tdesc = desc->threads[tid];
> + struct cpr_thread *thread = &drv->threads[tid];
> + bool pd_registered = false;
> + int ret, i;
> +
> + if (tdesc->step_quot_init_min > CPR3_CPR_STEP_QUOT_MIN_MASK ||
> + tdesc->step_quot_init_max > CPR3_CPR_STEP_QUOT_MAX_MASK)
> + return -EINVAL;
> +
> + thread->id = tid;
> + thread->drv = drv;
> + thread->desc = tdesc;
> + thread->fuse_corners = devm_kcalloc(drv->dev,
> + tdesc->num_fuse_corners +
> + drv->extra_corners,
> + sizeof(*thread->fuse_corners),
> + GFP_KERNEL);
> + if (!thread->fuse_corners)
> + return -ENOMEM;
> +
> + thread->cpr_fuses = cpr_get_fuses(drv->dev, tid,
> + tdesc->num_fuse_corners);
> + if (IS_ERR(thread->cpr_fuses))
> + return PTR_ERR(thread->cpr_fuses);
> +
> + ret = cpr_populate_ring_osc_idx(thread->drv->dev, thread->fuse_corners,
> + thread->cpr_fuses,
> + tdesc->num_fuse_corners);
> + if (ret)
> + return ret;
> +
> + ret = cpr_fuse_corner_init(thread);
> + if (ret)
> + return ret;
> +
> + thread->pd.name = devm_kasprintf(drv->dev, GFP_KERNEL,
> + "%s_thread%d",
> + drv->dev->of_node->full_name,
> + thread->id);
> + if (!thread->pd.name)
> + return -EINVAL;
> +
> + thread->pd.power_off = cpr_power_off;
> + thread->pd.power_on = cpr_power_on;
> + thread->pd.opp_to_performance_state = cpr_get_performance_state;
> + thread->pd.attach_dev = cpr_pd_attach_dev;
> + thread->pd.detach_dev = cpr_pd_detach_dev;
> +
> + /* CPR-Hardened performance states are managed in firmware */
> + if (desc->cpr_type == CTRL_TYPE_CPRH)
> + thread->pd.set_performance_state = cprh_dummy_set_performance_state;
The dummy function above always returns 0, without actually doing
anything. I am trying to understand the purpose of this.
Would you mind elaborating on this a bit?
> + else
> + thread->pd.set_performance_state = cpr_set_performance_state;
> +
> + /* Anything later than CPR1 must be always-on for now */
> + thread->pd.flags = GENPD_FLAG_ALWAYS_ON;
> +
> + drv->cell_data.domains[tid] = &thread->pd;
> +
> + ret = pm_genpd_init(&thread->pd, NULL, false);
> + if (ret < 0)
> + goto fail;
> + else
> + pd_registered = true;
> +
> + /* On CPRhardened, the interrupts are managed in firmware */
> + if (desc->cpr_type < CTRL_TYPE_CPRH) {
> + INIT_WORK(&thread->restart_work, cpr_restart_worker);
> +
> + ret = devm_request_threaded_irq(drv->dev, drv->irq,
> + NULL, cpr_irq_handler,
> + IRQF_ONESHOT |
> + IRQF_TRIGGER_RISING,
> + "cpr", drv);
> + if (ret)
> + goto fail;
> + }
> +
> + return 0;
> +
> +fail:
> + /* Unregister all previously registered genpds */
> + for (i = tid - pd_registered; i >= 0; i--)
> + pm_genpd_remove(&drv->threads[i].pd);
> +
> + return ret;
> +}
[...]
> +
> +static int cpr_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
> +{
> + struct cpr_drv *drv = platform_get_drvdata(pdev);
> + int i;
> +
> + of_genpd_del_provider(pdev->dev.of_node);
> +
> + for (i = 0; i < drv->desc->num_threads; i++) {
> + cpr_ctl_disable(&drv->threads[i]);
> + cpr_irq_set(&drv->threads[i], 0);
> + pm_genpd_remove(&drv->threads[i].pd);
> + }
> +
> + debugfs_remove_recursive(drv->debugfs);
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static const struct of_device_id cpr3_match_table[] = {
> + { .compatible = "qcom,msm8998-cprh", .data = &msm8998_cpr_acc_desc },
> + { .compatible = "qcom,sdm630-cprh", .data = &sdm630_cpr_acc_desc },
> + { }
> +};
> +MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, cpr3_match_table);
> +
> +static struct platform_driver cpr3_driver = {
> + .probe = cpr_probe,
> + .remove = cpr_remove,
There is this .remove_new callback, that you probably should use instead.
> + .driver = {
> + .name = "qcom-cpr3",
> + .of_match_table = cpr3_match_table,
> + },
> +};
> +module_platform_driver(cpr3_driver)
> +
[...]
Note that, this was mostly a drive-by-review, looking at the genpd
provider specific parts. In general this looks good to me, other than
the minor comments I had above.
Kind regards
Uffe
Powered by blists - more mailing lists