From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.5 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_NEOMUTT autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B8CFC43613 for ; Sat, 22 Jun 2019 18:51:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D8F8820673 for ; Sat, 22 Jun 2019 18:51:55 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key) header.d=armlinux.org.uk header.i=@armlinux.org.uk header.b="w1jBMoyV" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726286AbfFVSvz (ORCPT ); Sat, 22 Jun 2019 14:51:55 -0400 Received: from pandora.armlinux.org.uk ([78.32.30.218]:33692 "EHLO pandora.armlinux.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725995AbfFVSvz (ORCPT ); Sat, 22 Jun 2019 14:51:55 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=armlinux.org.uk; s=pandora-2019; h=Sender:In-Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:MIME-Version:References:Message-ID: Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id: List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=FNchdyzDRfton4O0BjEZ53xQZ5SAbOUZFhf5GgIrTak=; b=w1jBMoyVjRtHZfFywyPLoX6SG fVrxVeRH9G031W7YO9uOl2Cs72Z5dzJNJO2DmbJhLC4sk+E/ZJmIyCzwsDkLwiAmyXrhONIgqhWz+ gFRUJLo6zuRGWTHucavTJMfPVL/4c3ajmnkl8tX+glwSLJSEEpY6f6Hi7VGO0NIbnJZyYK2DV2F0l x/Ypqep2v08iITwWKB1aSTvC9xjW/r74Y3qDMWnpSvFLfkohzycUWTSOrJslpyM8sA9dGNbkYFMP8 g1vXD49S1vbdbHUuScLG8h+cZ28QG6kwxX/HFgM3QKCpaVqkpcVIqGcSem9J66J3d1YIQaX7uy6V5 p1LtQ6RIA==; Received: from shell.armlinux.org.uk ([fd8f:7570:feb6:1:5054:ff:fe00:4ec]:59892) by pandora.armlinux.org.uk with esmtpsa (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1hel79-0005LU-Sg; Sat, 22 Jun 2019 19:51:52 +0100 Received: from linux by shell.armlinux.org.uk with local (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1hel78-0004Np-Rg; Sat, 22 Jun 2019 19:51:50 +0100 Date: Sat, 22 Jun 2019 19:51:50 +0100 From: Russell King - ARM Linux admin To: Michael Olbrich Cc: Vinod Koul , dmaengine@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Lucas Stach Subject: Re: [BUG] imx-sdma: readl_relaxed_poll_timeout_atomic() conversion Message-ID: <20190622185150.b2megz2oinfvij3r@shell.armlinux.org.uk> References: <20190622165318.bgyun52hssqmdv4n@shell.armlinux.org.uk> <20190622181029.iy72xkz3xcomwjtl@pengutronix.de> <20190622184237.ld7xwc5kk7sbghae@shell.armlinux.org.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <20190622184237.ld7xwc5kk7sbghae@shell.armlinux.org.uk> User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170113 (1.7.2) Sender: dmaengine-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: dmaengine@vger.kernel.org On Sat, Jun 22, 2019 at 07:42:37PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux admin wrote: > On Sat, Jun 22, 2019 at 08:10:29PM +0200, Michael Olbrich wrote: > > On Sat, Jun 22, 2019 at 05:53:18PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux admin wrote: > > > Old code: > > > > > > - while (!(ret = readl_relaxed(sdma->regs + SDMA_H_INTR) & 1)) { > > > - if (timeout-- <= 0) > > > - break; > > > - udelay(1); > > > - } > > > > > > So, while bit 0 is _clear_ the loop continues to poll. > > > > > > > > > New code: > > > > > > + ret = readl_relaxed_poll_timeout_atomic(sdma->regs + SDMA_H_STATSTOP, > > > + reg, !(reg & 1), 1, 500); > > > > > > Doesn't really tell us what the termination condition is (because of > > > the obfuscation taking away the details), but if we dig into the > > > macro maze: > > > > > > #define readl_relaxed_poll_timeout_atomic(addr, val, cond, delay_us, timeout_us) \ > > > readx_poll_timeout_atomic(readl_relaxed, addr, val, cond, delay_us, timeout_us) > > > > > > #define readx_poll_timeout_atomic(op, addr, val, cond, delay_us, timeout_us) \ > > > ({ \ > > > u64 __timeout_us = (timeout_us); \ > > > unsigned long __delay_us = (delay_us); \ > > > ktime_t __timeout = ktime_add_us(ktime_get(), __timeout_us); \ > > > for (;;) { \ > > > (val) = op(addr); \ > > > if (cond) \ > > > break; \ > > > > > > "cond" is passed in to here unmodified, so this becomes: > > > > > > for (;;) { > > > reg = readl_relaxed(sdma->regs + SDMA_H_STATSTOP); > > > if (!(reg & 1)) > > > break; > > > > > > So, if bit 0 of this register is clear, we terminate the loop. > > > > > > Seems to me like this is a great illustration why using a helper > > > _introduces_ bugs, because it hides the detail about what the exit > > > condition for the embedded loop actually is, and leads to this kind > > > of error. > > > > > > In any case, the conversion is obviously incorrect. > > > > > > I occasionally see the "Timeout waiting for CH0 ready" error during > > > boot on a cbi4, which, given the above, means that we did end up > > > seeing bit 1 set (so according to the old code, we waited > > > successfully.) > > > > The old code was polling SDMA_H_INTR so it waited for the bit to be set. > > The new code (as documented in the commit message) polls SDMA_H_STATSTOP > > instead. > > I believe this register is called SDMAARM_STOP_STAT in the reference > > manual. And the documentation states: "Reading this register yields the > > current state of the HE[i] bits". > > And from the documentation of the SDMA "DONE" instruction: > > "Clear HE bit for the current channel, send an interrupt to the Arm > > platform for the current channel and reschedule." > > > > My interpretation of this is, that waiting for the bit in SDMA_H_STATSTOP > > to become zero has the same effect as waiting for the bit in SDMA_H_INTR to > > be set. Or am I missing something? > > So, why do all my iMX6 platforms now randomly spit out: > > "imx-sdma 20ec000.sdma: Timeout waiting for CH0 ready" > > at boot, whereas they didn't used to with older kernels? Maybe channel > 0 does not clear the HE[0] bit? > > The documentation explicitly states that for initialisation, the > following is required: > > • Set bit 0 of the SDMA_HSTART register to set HE[0] and allow Channel 0 > to run (assumes EO[0] and DO[0] were both set in previous step). This > will cause SDMA toload the program RAM and channel contexts configured > previously. > • Wait for Channel 0 to finish running. This is indicated by HI[0]=1 in > the SDMA_SDMA_INTR register, or by optional interrupt to the ARM platform. > > So, is there a way for a HI bit to be set without clearing the HE bit? > Yes, via the NOTIFY command: > > 55.5.2.35 NOTIFY (Notify to ARM platform) > Operation: > if (jjj & 4 == 0) > { > if (jjj&2 == 2) > HE[CCR] ← 0 > if (jjj&1== 1) > HI[CCR] ← 1 > } > else if (jjj == 4) > EP[CCR] ← 0 > else > > So, if jjj is 001 binary, the HE bit can remain set while the HI bit > is cleared. Maybe the firmware uses this rather than a DONE instruction Sorry, *set*. > when performing the initialisation functions, which means your idea of > going against what is specified in the manual, and using HE[0] instead > of HI[0] is on _very_ shakey ground. > > Given that I'm seeing the same issue on _four_ iMX6 platforms here, > I think it's pretty much obvious that your assumptions here are > false. > > > Michael > > > > > Looking at the date of the commit, this is almost a three year old > > > bug. > > > > > > -- > > > RMK's Patch system: https://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/ > > > FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line in suburbia: sync at 12.1Mbps down 622kbps up > > > According to speedtest.net: 11.9Mbps down 500kbps up > > > > > > > -- > > Pengutronix e.K. | | > > Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ | > > Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 | > > Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 | > > > > -- > RMK's Patch system: https://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/ > FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line in suburbia: sync at 12.1Mbps down 622kbps up > According to speedtest.net: 11.9Mbps down 500kbps up > > _______________________________________________ > linux-arm-kernel mailing list > linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org > http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel -- RMK's Patch system: https://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/ FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line in suburbia: sync at 12.1Mbps down 622kbps up According to speedtest.net: 11.9Mbps down 500kbps up