From: Sai Prakash Ranjan <saiprakash.ranjan@codeaurora.org>
To: Mike Leach <mike.leach@linaro.org>,
Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>
Cc: Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@linaro.org>,
Stephen Boyd <swboyd@chromium.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
Russell King <linux@armlinux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] coresight: dynamic-replicator: Fix handling of multiple connections
Date: Wed, 06 May 2020 13:05:21 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <b8c1cc35846d425a1677c73fddf5874d@codeaurora.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ae0fe2050be01cc1403c7d53a0da8cb8@codeaurora.org>
Hi Suzuki, Mike,
On 2020-04-29 22:41, Sai Prakash Ranjan wrote:
> Hi Mike,
>
> On 2020-04-29 22:28, Mike Leach wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>
> [...]
>
>>> >> > You need to find what is resetting the IDFILTERs to 0 for replicator1.
>>> >> >
>>> >>
>>> >> That is right.
>>> >>
>>> >
>>> > By default all replicators have the IDFILTER registers set to 0 out of
>>> > hardware reset. This ensures that programmable replicators behave in
>>> > the same way as non-programmable replicators out of reset.
>>> >
>>> > The dynamic_replicator_reset() is of course a driver state reset -
>>> > which filters out all trace on the output ports. The trace is then
>>> > enabled when we set the trace path from source to sink.
>>> >
>>>
>>> Thanks for these explanations.
>>>
>>> > It seems to me that you have 2 problems that need solving here:
>>> >
>>> > 1) Why does the reset_replicator() called from probe() _not_ work
>>> > correctly on replicator 1? It seems to work later if you introduce a
>>> > reset after more of the system has powered and booted. This is
>>> > startiing to look a little like a PM / clocking issue.
>>>
>>> reset_replicator() does work in probe correctly for both replicators,
>>> below logs is collected before and after reset in probe. It is later
>>> that it's set back to 0x0 and hence the suggestion to look at
>>> firmware
>>> using this replicator1.
>>>
>> OK - sorry I read your statement saying that replicator1 was 0 after
>> the reset in probe(), rather than look at the logs.
>>
>> From the logs it is working at the time probe() occurs, but by the
>> time we come to enable the replicator later, something has reset these
>> registers / hardware outside the control of the replicator driver.
>>
>
> Yes, I will try to get some more information from the firmware side if
> there is anything messing up.
>
This turned out to be a clock/pm issue. To confirm, I just marked clk as
critical
so that it won't be gated and I saw the replicator1(swao_replicator)
registers
intact after probe. Also alternatively, I tried to comment out disabling
pclk
to check if there is something wrong in amba pm and this keeps the
registers
intact as well.
@@ -288,7 +295,7 @@ static int amba_probe(struct device *dev)
pm_runtime_set_suspended(dev);
pm_runtime_put_noidle(dev);
- amba_put_disable_pclk(pcdev);
+ //amba_put_disable_pclk(pcdev);
dev_pm_domain_detach(dev, true);
} while (0);
Thanks,
Sai
--
QUALCOMM INDIA, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a
member
of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Sai Prakash Ranjan <saiprakash.ranjan@codeaurora.org>
To: Mike Leach <mike.leach@linaro.org>,
Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>
Cc: Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@linaro.org>,
linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org,
Russell King <linux@armlinux.org.uk>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Stephen Boyd <swboyd@chromium.org>,
linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] coresight: dynamic-replicator: Fix handling of multiple connections
Date: Wed, 06 May 2020 13:05:21 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <b8c1cc35846d425a1677c73fddf5874d@codeaurora.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ae0fe2050be01cc1403c7d53a0da8cb8@codeaurora.org>
Hi Suzuki, Mike,
On 2020-04-29 22:41, Sai Prakash Ranjan wrote:
> Hi Mike,
>
> On 2020-04-29 22:28, Mike Leach wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>
> [...]
>
>>> >> > You need to find what is resetting the IDFILTERs to 0 for replicator1.
>>> >> >
>>> >>
>>> >> That is right.
>>> >>
>>> >
>>> > By default all replicators have the IDFILTER registers set to 0 out of
>>> > hardware reset. This ensures that programmable replicators behave in
>>> > the same way as non-programmable replicators out of reset.
>>> >
>>> > The dynamic_replicator_reset() is of course a driver state reset -
>>> > which filters out all trace on the output ports. The trace is then
>>> > enabled when we set the trace path from source to sink.
>>> >
>>>
>>> Thanks for these explanations.
>>>
>>> > It seems to me that you have 2 problems that need solving here:
>>> >
>>> > 1) Why does the reset_replicator() called from probe() _not_ work
>>> > correctly on replicator 1? It seems to work later if you introduce a
>>> > reset after more of the system has powered and booted. This is
>>> > startiing to look a little like a PM / clocking issue.
>>>
>>> reset_replicator() does work in probe correctly for both replicators,
>>> below logs is collected before and after reset in probe. It is later
>>> that it's set back to 0x0 and hence the suggestion to look at
>>> firmware
>>> using this replicator1.
>>>
>> OK - sorry I read your statement saying that replicator1 was 0 after
>> the reset in probe(), rather than look at the logs.
>>
>> From the logs it is working at the time probe() occurs, but by the
>> time we come to enable the replicator later, something has reset these
>> registers / hardware outside the control of the replicator driver.
>>
>
> Yes, I will try to get some more information from the firmware side if
> there is anything messing up.
>
This turned out to be a clock/pm issue. To confirm, I just marked clk as
critical
so that it won't be gated and I saw the replicator1(swao_replicator)
registers
intact after probe. Also alternatively, I tried to comment out disabling
pclk
to check if there is something wrong in amba pm and this keeps the
registers
intact as well.
@@ -288,7 +295,7 @@ static int amba_probe(struct device *dev)
pm_runtime_set_suspended(dev);
pm_runtime_put_noidle(dev);
- amba_put_disable_pclk(pcdev);
+ //amba_put_disable_pclk(pcdev);
dev_pm_domain_detach(dev, true);
} while (0);
Thanks,
Sai
--
QUALCOMM INDIA, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a
member
of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-05-06 7:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 56+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-04-26 14:37 [PATCH] coresight: dynamic-replicator: Fix handling of multiple connections Sai Prakash Ranjan
2020-04-26 14:37 ` Sai Prakash Ranjan
2020-04-27 9:20 ` Suzuki K Poulose
2020-04-27 9:20 ` Suzuki K Poulose
2020-04-27 9:45 ` Mike Leach
2020-04-27 9:45 ` Mike Leach
2020-04-27 13:53 ` Suzuki K Poulose
2020-04-27 13:53 ` Suzuki K Poulose
2020-04-28 12:23 ` Sai Prakash Ranjan
2020-04-28 12:23 ` Sai Prakash Ranjan
2020-04-29 11:47 ` Sai Prakash Ranjan
2020-04-29 11:47 ` Sai Prakash Ranjan
2020-04-29 13:49 ` Suzuki K Poulose
2020-04-29 13:49 ` Suzuki K Poulose
2020-04-29 13:59 ` Sai Prakash Ranjan
2020-04-29 13:59 ` Sai Prakash Ranjan
2020-04-29 14:27 ` Mike Leach
2020-04-29 14:27 ` Mike Leach
2020-04-29 14:48 ` Sai Prakash Ranjan
2020-04-29 14:48 ` Sai Prakash Ranjan
2020-04-29 16:58 ` Mike Leach
2020-04-29 16:58 ` Mike Leach
2020-04-29 17:11 ` Sai Prakash Ranjan
2020-04-29 17:11 ` Sai Prakash Ranjan
2020-05-06 7:35 ` Sai Prakash Ranjan [this message]
2020-05-06 7:35 ` Sai Prakash Ranjan
2020-05-08 8:53 ` Sai Prakash Ranjan
2020-05-08 8:53 ` Sai Prakash Ranjan
2020-05-11 11:14 ` Mike Leach
2020-05-11 11:14 ` Mike Leach
2020-05-11 14:16 ` Sai Prakash Ranjan
2020-05-11 14:16 ` Sai Prakash Ranjan
2020-05-11 14:30 ` Suzuki K Poulose
2020-05-11 14:30 ` Suzuki K Poulose
2020-05-11 14:41 ` Sai Prakash Ranjan
2020-05-11 14:41 ` Sai Prakash Ranjan
2020-05-12 11:49 ` Mike Leach
2020-05-12 11:49 ` Mike Leach
2020-05-12 17:45 ` Mathieu Poirier
2020-05-12 17:45 ` Mathieu Poirier
2020-05-12 17:46 ` Sai Prakash Ranjan
2020-05-12 17:46 ` Sai Prakash Ranjan
2020-05-12 21:52 ` Mike Leach
2020-05-12 21:52 ` Mike Leach
2020-05-13 1:49 ` Stephen Boyd
2020-05-13 1:49 ` Stephen Boyd
2020-05-13 15:45 ` Sai Prakash Ranjan
2020-05-13 15:45 ` Sai Prakash Ranjan
2020-05-13 15:33 ` Sai Prakash Ranjan
2020-05-13 15:33 ` Sai Prakash Ranjan
2020-05-16 10:04 ` Sai Prakash Ranjan
2020-05-16 10:04 ` Sai Prakash Ranjan
2020-05-19 9:04 ` Sai Prakash Ranjan
2020-05-19 9:04 ` Sai Prakash Ranjan
2020-05-11 14:34 ` Sai Prakash Ranjan
2020-05-11 14:34 ` Sai Prakash Ranjan
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=b8c1cc35846d425a1677c73fddf5874d@codeaurora.org \
--to=saiprakash.ranjan@codeaurora.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@armlinux.org.uk \
--cc=mathieu.poirier@linaro.org \
--cc=mike.leach@linaro.org \
--cc=suzuki.poulose@arm.com \
--cc=swboyd@chromium.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.