linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/3] arm64: dts: qcom: sc8280xp: Fix PCIe PHY power-domains

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2024 19:41:31 +0100
From: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>
To: Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@...aro.org>,
 Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org>
Cc: Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>, Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
 Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
 Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, Johan Hovold <johan+linaro@...nel.org>,
 Marijn Suijten <marijn.suijten@...ainline.org>,
 linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>,
 Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...ainline.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] arm64: dts: qcom: sc8280xp: Fix PCIe PHY
 power-domains



On 1/23/24 18:06, Manivannan Sadhasivam wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 22, 2024 at 06:36:51PM +0100, Johan Hovold wrote:
>> On Mon, Jan 22, 2024 at 10:55:28PM +0530, Manivannan Sadhasivam wrote:
>>> On Fri, Dec 29, 2023 at 10:33:34PM +0530, Manivannan Sadhasivam wrote:
>>>> On Fri, Dec 29, 2023 at 12:24:55PM +0100, Johan Hovold wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, Dec 27, 2023 at 11:28:26PM +0100, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
>>>>>> The PCIe GDSCs are only related to the RCs. The PCIe PHYs on the other
>>>>>> hand, are powered by VDD_MX and their specific VDDA_PHY/PLL regulators.
>>>>>
>>>>> No, that does not seem to be entirely correct. I added the power-domains
>>>>> here precisely because they were needed to enable the PHYs.
>>>>>
>>>>> This is something I stumbled over when trying to figure out how to
>>>>> add support for the second lane pair (i.e. four-lane mode), and I just
>>>>> went back and confirmed that this is still the case.
>>>>>
>>>>> If you try to enable one of these PHYs without the corresponding GDSC
>>>>> being enabled, you end up with:
>>>>>
>>>>> [   37.709324] ------------[ cut here ]------------
>>>>> [   37.718196] gcc_pcie_3b_aux_clk status stuck at 'off'
>>>>> [   37.718205] WARNING: CPU: 4 PID: 482 at drivers/clk/qcom/clk-branch.c:86 clk_branch_wait+0x144/0x15c
>>>>> 	
>>>>
>>>> Technically this patch is correct. PHYs are backed by MX domain only and not
>>>> GDSCs. Only the controllers (PCIe, UFS, USB) are backed by GDSCs. The fact that
>>>> you are seeing issue with PCIe Aux clock suggests me that this clock may not be
>>>> applicable to the PHY but it needs to be enabled for working of the PHY somehow.
>>>> I'll try to find the details on how exactly it is needed.
>>>>
>>>> But if I get the answer like, "This clock is also sourced to PHY directly", then
>>>> we may need to add dual power domain for PHY (both GDSC and MX).
>>>>
>>>
>>> So I answer I got from Qcom is that this clock is only applicable to the PCIe
>>> controller and not PHYs. On some platforms, there is a separate PCIE_PHY_AUX_CLK
>>> coming from GCC that is used during L1SS state. I think that caused confusion
>>> while adding PHY support for followup platforms and folks just used PCIE_AUX_CLK
>>> since they couldn't find the actual PCIE_PHY_AUX_CLK.
>>
>> Thanks for sorting that out.
>>
>>> I've prepared a series to fix this mess, but I want to know how you end up
>>> seeing the above "clk status stuck at off" issue. Is there an actual usecase for
>>> powering up PHY without controller or you just experimented with it?
>>
>> As I mentioned, I ran into this when experimenting with how to enable
>> the "companion" PHY for four-lane support. There shouldn't be any use
>> case for it (apart from using it to determine that the current
>> description of the PHY resources is incomplete or incorrect).
>>
> 
> Ok. I tested by enabling the PHY clocks during qmp_pcie_clk_init() without
> PCIE_GDSC. It worked for one instance of the PHY which doesn't have
> PCIE_PHY_AUX_CLK, but for the PHY instance with this clock, I saw the same "clk
> stuck" issue. Then checking the internal documentation revealed that this clock
> needs PCIE_GDSC to become functional >.<
> 
> So to conclude, PCIE_AUX_CLK belongs to the controller and it needs GDSC. And
> PCIE_PHY_AUX_CLK belongs to the PHY and it also needs GDSC.
> 
> I will just submit a series to remove the PCIE_AUX_CLK from PHY nodes. Then
> in another series, I'll remove the GDSC for PHY instances that do not require
> PCIE_PHY_AUX_CLK.
> 
> Hope this makes sense.

Thanks, Mani

Konrad