Message-ID: <20240126084309.GM74950@google.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2024 08:43:09 +0000
From: Lee Jones <lee@...nel.org>
To: Saravana Kannan <saravanak@...gle.com>
Cc: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>,
	Peter Griffin <peter.griffin@...aro.org>, arnd@...db.de,
	robh+dt@...nel.org, krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org,
	linux@...ck-us.net, wim@...ux-watchdog.org, conor+dt@...nel.org,
	alim.akhtar@...sung.com, jaewon02.kim@...sung.com,
	chanho61.park@...sung.com, semen.protsenko@...aro.org,
	kernel-team@...roid.com, tudor.ambarus@...aro.org,
	andre.draszik@...aro.org, willmcvicker@...gle.com,
	linux-fsd@...la.com, linux-watchdog@...r.kernel.org,
	devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/9] watchdog: s3c2410_wdt: update to use new
 exynos_pmu_*() apis

On Thu, 25 Jan 2024, Saravana Kannan wrote:

> On Thu, Jan 25, 2024 at 3:46 AM Lee Jones <lee@...nel.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 25 Jan 2024, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> >
> > > On 24/01/2024 22:27, Saravana Kannan wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Jan 23, 2024 at 10:27 PM Krzysztof Kozlowski
> > > > <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> On 24/01/2024 04:37, Saravana Kannan wrote:
> > > >>> On Tue, Jan 23, 2024 at 10:12 AM Krzysztof Kozlowski
> > > >>> <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org> wrote:
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> On 23/01/2024 18:30, Peter Griffin wrote:
> > > >>>>>>>               dev_warn(wdt->dev, "Couldn't get RST_STAT register\n");
> > > >>>>>>>       else if (rst_stat & BIT(wdt->drv_data->rst_stat_bit))
> > > >>>>>>> @@ -698,14 +699,6 @@ static int s3c2410wdt_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > > >>>>>>>       if (ret)
> > > >>>>>>>               return ret;
> > > >>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>> -     if (wdt->drv_data->quirks & QUIRKS_HAVE_PMUREG) {
> > > >>>>>>> -             wdt->pmureg = syscon_regmap_lookup_by_phandle(dev->of_node,
> > > >>>>>>> -                                             "samsung,syscon-phandle");
> > > >>>>>>> -             if (IS_ERR(wdt->pmureg))
> > > >>>>>>> -                     return dev_err_probe(dev, PTR_ERR(wdt->pmureg),
> > > >>>>>>> -                                          "syscon regmap lookup failed.\n");
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> Continuing topic from the binding: I don't see how you handle probe
> > > >>>>>> deferral, suspend ordering.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> The current implementation is simply relying on exynos-pmu being
> > > >>>>> postcore_initcall level.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> I was just looking around for any existing Linux APIs that could be a
> > > >>>>> more robust solution. It looks like
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> of_parse_phandle()
> > > >>>>> and
> > > >>>>> of_find_device_by_node();
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> Are often used to solve this type of probe deferral issue between
> > > >>>>> devices. Is that what you would recommend using? Or is there something
> > > >>>>> even better?
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> I think you should keep the phandle and then set device link based on
> > > >>>> of_find_device_by_node(). This would actually improve the code, because
> > > >>>> syscon_regmap_lookup_by_phandle() does not create device links.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> I kinda agree with this. Just because we no longer use a syscon API to
> > > >>> find the PMU register address doesn't mean the WDT doesn't depend on
> > > >>> the PMU.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> However, I think we should move to a generic "syscon" property. Then I
> > > >>> can add support for "syscon" property to fw_devlink and then things
> > > >>> will just work in terms of probe ordering, suspend/resume and also
> > > >>> showing the dependency in DT even if you don't use the syscon APIs.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Side note 1:
> > > >>>
> > > >>> I think we really should officially document a generic syscon DT
> > > >>> property similar to how we have a generic "clocks" or "dmas" property.
> > > >>> Then we can have a syscon_get_regmap() that's like so:
> > > >>>
> > > >>> struct regmap *syscon_get_regmap(struct device *dev)
> > > >>> {
> > > >>>         return syscon_regmap_lookup_by_phandle(dev->of_node, "syscon");
> > > >>> }
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Instead of every device defining its own bespoke DT property to do the
> > > >>> exact same thing. I did a quick "back of the envelope" grep on this
> > > >>> and I get about 143 unique properties just to get the syscon regmap.
> > > >>> $ git grep -A1 syscon_regmap_lookup_by_phandle | grep '"' | sed -e
> > > >>> 's/^[^"]*//' -e 's/"[^"]*$/"/' | sort | uniq | wc -l
> > > >>> 143
> > > >>
> > > >> Sorry, generic "syscon" property won't fly with DT maintainers, because
> > > >> there is no such thing as syscon in any of hardware.
> > > >
> > > > Then why do we allow a "syscon" compatible string and nodes? If the
> > >
> > > To bind Linux drivers.
> > >
> > > > "syscon" property isn't clear enough, we can make it something like
> > > > gpios and have it be <whatever>-syscon or have syscon-names property
> > > > if you want to give it a name.
> > >
> > > This could work.
> >
> > I'm not opposed to this idea.  The issue you'll have is keeping the
> > kernel backwards compatible with older DTBs, thus this solution may only
> > be possible for newly created bindings.  More than happy to be proven
> > wrong here though.
> 
> You are right about backwards compatibility. Technically, we might be
> able to fix up the DT at runtime (by keeping a list of those 143
> property names) to maintain backward compatibility, but I'm not
> suggesting that.
> 
> We can leave the existing ones as is, but we can at least use the new
> property going forward to make dependencies easier to track and handle

Automatic tracking and device linking sounds like a worthwhile endeavour.

> -Saravana

I nearly stopped reading here.

> > > >>> How are we making sure that it's the exynos-pmu driver that ends up
> > > >>> probing the PMU and not the generic syscon driver? Both of these are
> > > >>> platform drivers. And the exynos PMU device lists both the exynos
> > > >>> compatible string and the syscon property. Is it purely a link order
> > > >>> coincidence?
> > > >>
> > > >> initcall ordering
> > > >
> > > > Both these drivers usr postcore_initcall(). So it's purely because
> > > > soc/ is listed earlier in drivers/Makefile than mfd/. And as soon as
> > >
> > > Oh... great :/.
> >
> > Agree.
> >
> > Even using initcalls for ordering is fragile.  Relying on the
> > lexicographical order of a directory / filename structure is akin to
> > rolling a dice.  It would be far nicer if you are able to find a more
> > robust method of ensuring load order e.g. dynamically poking at
> > hardware and / or utilising -EPROBE_DEFER.
> 
> Let me dig in to see if all the existing examples of listing syscon in
> compatible AND have a different driver that needs to probe it always
> list syscon as a secondary compatible string. In that case, we might
> be able to make the syscon driver only match with the device it it's
> the first entry in the compatible string.

If using clever or non-obvious means by which to ensure correct
ordering, I would suggest putting in place very obvious
documentation/commentary verbosely describing the aim and method.

-- 
Lee Jones [李琼斯]

Powered by blists - more mailing lists