From: alexander.stein@systec-electronic.com (Alexander Stein)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH v2 2/2] ARM: at91: pm: switch to the PIE infrastructure
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2016 08:12:21 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <2349417.jWuiI2GXql@ws-stein> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1467153886-21144-3-git-send-email-alexandre.belloni@free-electrons.com>
On Wednesday 29 June 2016 00:44:46, Alexandre Belloni wrote:
> Using the PIE infrastructure allows to write the whole suspend/resume
> functions in C instead of assembly.
>
> The only remaining assembly instruction is wfi for armv5
> It makes the code shorter and clearer.
>
> Signed-off-by: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@free-electrons.com>
> ---
> arch/arm/mach-at91/Kconfig | 1 +
> arch/arm/mach-at91/Makefile | 2 +-
> arch/arm/mach-at91/pm.c | 31 ++--
> arch/arm/mach-at91/pm/.gitignore | 2 +
> arch/arm/mach-at91/pm/Makefile | 3 +
> arch/arm/mach-at91/pm/atmel_pm.c | 97 +++++++++++
> arch/arm/mach-at91/pm_suspend.S | 338
> [...]
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-at91/pm/atmel_pm.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,97 @@
> +#include <linux/io.h>
> +#include <linux/clk/at91_pmc.h>
> +#include <linux/mfd/syscon/atmel-mc.h>
> +#include <linux/pie.h>
> +#include "../pm.h"
> +
> +#define SRAMC_SELF_FRESH_ACTIVE 0x01
> +#define SRAMC_SELF_FRESH_EXIT 0x00
> +
> +static void at91_sramc_self_refresh(unsigned int is_active,
> + unsigned int memtype,
> + void __iomem *sdramc_base,
> + void __iomem *sdramc_base1)
> +{
> + static unsigned int lpr, mdr, lpr1, mdr1;
> +
> + switch (memtype) {
> + case AT91_MEMCTRL_MC:
> + /*
> + * at91rm9200 Memory controller
> + */
> + if (is_active)
> + __raw_writel(1, sdramc_base + AT91_MC_SDRAMC_SRR);
> + break;
> +
> + case AT91_MEMCTRL_DDRSDR:
> + if (is_active) {
> + mdr = __raw_readl(sdramc_base + AT91_DDRSDRC_MDR);
> + lpr = __raw_readl(sdramc_base + AT91_DDRSDRC_LPR);
> +
> + if ((mdr & AT91_DDRSDRC_MD) == AT91_DDRSDRC_MD_LOW_POWER_DDR)
> + __raw_writel((mdr & ~AT91_DDRSDRC_MD) |
> + AT91_DDRSDRC_MD_DDR2, sdramc_base +
> + AT91_DDRSDRC_MDR);
> + __raw_writel((lpr & ~AT91_DDRSDRC_LPCB) |
> + AT91_DDRSDRC_LPCB_SELF_REFRESH, sdramc_base
> + + AT91_DDRSDRC_LPR);
> +
> + if (sdramc_base1) {
> + mdr1 = __raw_readl(sdramc_base1 + AT91_DDRSDRC_MDR);
> + lpr1 = __raw_readl(sdramc_base1 + AT91_DDRSDRC_LPR);
> + if ((mdr1 & AT91_DDRSDRC_MD) ==
AT91_DDRSDRC_MD_LOW_POWER_DDR)
> + __raw_writel((mdr1 & ~AT91_DDRSDRC_MD) |
> + AT91_DDRSDRC_MD_DDR2,
> + sdramc_base1 +
> + AT91_DDRSDRC_MDR);
> + __raw_writel((lpr1 & ~AT91_DDRSDRC_LPCB) |
> + AT91_DDRSDRC_LPCB_SELF_REFRESH,
> + sdramc_base1 + AT91_DDRSDRC_LPR);
> + }
> + } else {
> + __raw_writel(mdr, sdramc_base + AT91_DDRSDRC_MDR);
> + __raw_writel(lpr, sdramc_base + AT91_DDRSDRC_LPR);
> + if (sdramc_base1) {
> + __raw_writel(mdr, sdramc_base1 + AT91_DDRSDRC_MDR);
> + __raw_writel(lpr, sdramc_base1 + AT91_DDRSDRC_LPR);
> + }
> + }
> + break;
> +
> + case AT91_MEMCTRL_SDRAMC:
> + if (is_active) {
> + lpr = __raw_readl(sdramc_base + AT91_SDRAMC_LPR);
> +
> + __raw_writel((lpr & ~AT91_SDRAMC_LPCB) |
> + AT91_SDRAMC_LPCB_SELF_REFRESH, sdramc_base
> + + AT91_SDRAMC_LPR);
> + } else {
> + __raw_writel(lpr, sdramc_base + AT91_SDRAMC_LPR);
> + }
> + break;
> + }
> +}
> +
> +void atmel_pm_suspend(void __iomem *pmc, void __iomem *ramc0,
> + void __iomem *ramc1, int memctrl)
> +{
> + int memtype, pm_mode;
> +
> + memtype = memctrl & AT91_PM_MEMTYPE_MASK;
> + pm_mode = (memctrl >> AT91_PM_MODE_OFFSET) & AT91_PM_MODE_MASK;
> +
> + dsb();
> +
> + at91_sramc_self_refresh(1, memtype, ramc0, ramc1);
> +
> +#if defined(CONFIG_CPU_V7)
> + dsb();
> + wfi();
> +#else
> + asm volatile ("mcr p15, 0, %0, c7, c0, 4" \
> + : : "r" (0) : "memory");
> +#endif
Why not defining wfi() for __LINUX_ARM_ARCH__ < 7 as it is done for dsb() and
friends in arch/arm/include/asm/barrier.h? So you can get rid of that #if
completly.
> + at91_sramc_self_refresh(0, memtype, ramc0, ramc1);
> +}
> +EXPORT_PIE_SYMBOL(atmel_pm_suspend);
Best regards,
Alexander
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Alexander Stein <alexander.stein@systec-electronic.com>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@free-electrons.com>,
Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@arm.com>,
Doug Anderson <dianders@chromium.org>,
Heiko Stuebner <heiko@sntech.de>,
Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@atmel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] ARM: at91: pm: switch to the PIE infrastructure
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2016 08:12:21 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <2349417.jWuiI2GXql@ws-stein> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1467153886-21144-3-git-send-email-alexandre.belloni@free-electrons.com>
On Wednesday 29 June 2016 00:44:46, Alexandre Belloni wrote:
> Using the PIE infrastructure allows to write the whole suspend/resume
> functions in C instead of assembly.
>
> The only remaining assembly instruction is wfi for armv5
> It makes the code shorter and clearer.
>
> Signed-off-by: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@free-electrons.com>
> ---
> arch/arm/mach-at91/Kconfig | 1 +
> arch/arm/mach-at91/Makefile | 2 +-
> arch/arm/mach-at91/pm.c | 31 ++--
> arch/arm/mach-at91/pm/.gitignore | 2 +
> arch/arm/mach-at91/pm/Makefile | 3 +
> arch/arm/mach-at91/pm/atmel_pm.c | 97 +++++++++++
> arch/arm/mach-at91/pm_suspend.S | 338
> [...]
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-at91/pm/atmel_pm.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,97 @@
> +#include <linux/io.h>
> +#include <linux/clk/at91_pmc.h>
> +#include <linux/mfd/syscon/atmel-mc.h>
> +#include <linux/pie.h>
> +#include "../pm.h"
> +
> +#define SRAMC_SELF_FRESH_ACTIVE 0x01
> +#define SRAMC_SELF_FRESH_EXIT 0x00
> +
> +static void at91_sramc_self_refresh(unsigned int is_active,
> + unsigned int memtype,
> + void __iomem *sdramc_base,
> + void __iomem *sdramc_base1)
> +{
> + static unsigned int lpr, mdr, lpr1, mdr1;
> +
> + switch (memtype) {
> + case AT91_MEMCTRL_MC:
> + /*
> + * at91rm9200 Memory controller
> + */
> + if (is_active)
> + __raw_writel(1, sdramc_base + AT91_MC_SDRAMC_SRR);
> + break;
> +
> + case AT91_MEMCTRL_DDRSDR:
> + if (is_active) {
> + mdr = __raw_readl(sdramc_base + AT91_DDRSDRC_MDR);
> + lpr = __raw_readl(sdramc_base + AT91_DDRSDRC_LPR);
> +
> + if ((mdr & AT91_DDRSDRC_MD) == AT91_DDRSDRC_MD_LOW_POWER_DDR)
> + __raw_writel((mdr & ~AT91_DDRSDRC_MD) |
> + AT91_DDRSDRC_MD_DDR2, sdramc_base +
> + AT91_DDRSDRC_MDR);
> + __raw_writel((lpr & ~AT91_DDRSDRC_LPCB) |
> + AT91_DDRSDRC_LPCB_SELF_REFRESH, sdramc_base
> + + AT91_DDRSDRC_LPR);
> +
> + if (sdramc_base1) {
> + mdr1 = __raw_readl(sdramc_base1 + AT91_DDRSDRC_MDR);
> + lpr1 = __raw_readl(sdramc_base1 + AT91_DDRSDRC_LPR);
> + if ((mdr1 & AT91_DDRSDRC_MD) ==
AT91_DDRSDRC_MD_LOW_POWER_DDR)
> + __raw_writel((mdr1 & ~AT91_DDRSDRC_MD) |
> + AT91_DDRSDRC_MD_DDR2,
> + sdramc_base1 +
> + AT91_DDRSDRC_MDR);
> + __raw_writel((lpr1 & ~AT91_DDRSDRC_LPCB) |
> + AT91_DDRSDRC_LPCB_SELF_REFRESH,
> + sdramc_base1 + AT91_DDRSDRC_LPR);
> + }
> + } else {
> + __raw_writel(mdr, sdramc_base + AT91_DDRSDRC_MDR);
> + __raw_writel(lpr, sdramc_base + AT91_DDRSDRC_LPR);
> + if (sdramc_base1) {
> + __raw_writel(mdr, sdramc_base1 + AT91_DDRSDRC_MDR);
> + __raw_writel(lpr, sdramc_base1 + AT91_DDRSDRC_LPR);
> + }
> + }
> + break;
> +
> + case AT91_MEMCTRL_SDRAMC:
> + if (is_active) {
> + lpr = __raw_readl(sdramc_base + AT91_SDRAMC_LPR);
> +
> + __raw_writel((lpr & ~AT91_SDRAMC_LPCB) |
> + AT91_SDRAMC_LPCB_SELF_REFRESH, sdramc_base
> + + AT91_SDRAMC_LPR);
> + } else {
> + __raw_writel(lpr, sdramc_base + AT91_SDRAMC_LPR);
> + }
> + break;
> + }
> +}
> +
> +void atmel_pm_suspend(void __iomem *pmc, void __iomem *ramc0,
> + void __iomem *ramc1, int memctrl)
> +{
> + int memtype, pm_mode;
> +
> + memtype = memctrl & AT91_PM_MEMTYPE_MASK;
> + pm_mode = (memctrl >> AT91_PM_MODE_OFFSET) & AT91_PM_MODE_MASK;
> +
> + dsb();
> +
> + at91_sramc_self_refresh(1, memtype, ramc0, ramc1);
> +
> +#if defined(CONFIG_CPU_V7)
> + dsb();
> + wfi();
> +#else
> + asm volatile ("mcr p15, 0, %0, c7, c0, 4" \
> + : : "r" (0) : "memory");
> +#endif
Why not defining wfi() for __LINUX_ARM_ARCH__ < 7 as it is done for dsb() and
friends in arch/arm/include/asm/barrier.h? So you can get rid of that #if
completly.
> + at91_sramc_self_refresh(0, memtype, ramc0, ramc1);
> +}
> +EXPORT_PIE_SYMBOL(atmel_pm_suspend);
Best regards,
Alexander
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-06-29 6:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-06-28 22:44 [PATCH v2 0/2] Embedding Position Independent Executables Alexandre Belloni
2016-06-28 22:44 ` Alexandre Belloni
2016-06-28 22:44 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] ARM: PIE infrastructure Alexandre Belloni
2016-06-28 22:44 ` Alexandre Belloni
2016-06-28 22:44 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] ARM: at91: pm: switch to the " Alexandre Belloni
2016-06-28 22:44 ` Alexandre Belloni
2016-06-29 6:12 ` Alexander Stein [this message]
2016-06-29 6:12 ` Alexander Stein
2016-06-29 7:57 ` Alexandre Belloni
2016-06-29 7:57 ` Alexandre Belloni
2016-06-29 8:30 ` Alexander Stein
2016-06-29 8:30 ` Alexander Stein
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=2349417.jWuiI2GXql@ws-stein \
--to=alexander.stein@systec-electronic.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.