From: kesavan.abhilash@gmail.com (Abhilash Kesavan)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Problems booting exynos5420 with >1 CPU
Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2014 02:16:27 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAM4voanSpTd=dAXLZhdZKRP4Z_YShbD4Hr-6UWn3DFYueoxeTA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140606203721.GA10422@quad.lixom.net>
Hi Olof,
On Sat, Jun 7, 2014 at 2:07 AM, Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net> wrote:
> [Adding Nico since he was involved in the original reviews]
>
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, Jun 06, 2014 at 11:20:56AM -0700, Doug Anderson wrote:
>> Abhilash,
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 11:12 AM, Abhilash Kesavan
>> <kesavan.abhilash@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > Hi Doug,
>> >
>> > On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 11:32 PM, Doug Anderson <dianders@google.com> wrote:
>> >> Abhilash,
>> >>
>> >> On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 10:36 AM, Abhilash Kesavan
>> >> <kesavan.abhilash@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>> Hi Doug,
>> >>>
>> >>> The first change in the kernel (clearing an iRAM location) is needed
>> >>> because of an unnecessary change that we are carrying in the Chrome
>> >>> U-boot. There is no reason for us to have the workaround in the
>> >>> mainline kernel. Rather, we should remove the check from our u-boot.
>> >>> However AFAIR a clean-up patch that I had posted internally was not
>> >>> accepted as we had frozen the SPL at the time.
>> >>
>> >> Ah, is that this one, or a different one?
>> >>
>> >> https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/#/c/66049/
>> > Yes, this along with a kernel side change.
>>
>> Can we safely take this one without the kernel-side one?
>>
>>
>> >> If we land that patch now it won't help since nobody is going to be
>> >> updating their read-only firmware. We'll need to put code somewhere
>> >> that fixes it.
>> > We just carry the workaround fix locally until we migrate to mainline
>> > u-boot for 5420 where the unnecessay check will not be present.
>>
>> I think there are people out there who want to run a mainline kernel
>> on existing Chromebook 2 hardware and don't want to rewrite their RO
>> firmware. We need a solution for those people.
>
> Agree. The answer to this is most definitely _not_ "install mainline u-boot".
> The upstream kernel needs to be able to boot with the firmware that was shipped
> on the device.
My answer is not "use mainline u-boot" primarily because I am not sure
mainline u-boot actually works on 5420 :). My answer is keep a patch
locally (or make a trivial change to the bootcmd) for people who would
like to use an upstream kernel with the firmware on the device. Once
we do have a working mainline u-boot, that can then be used by the
interested parties.
>
> In this case it shouldn't be controversial to add this. What we need is
> a one-time boot-time setup, not runtime so cpuidle shouldn't be a factor
> at that time. The earlier reservations were about runtime changes and this is
> quite different.
I think there is some confusion here, the clearing of the iRAM
location is what I have been pushing against. It has got nothing to do
cpuidle. If it were to be done then it would be a one time setup and
I could quite easily do it in mcpm_init.
Regards,
Abhilash
>
>> >>> The second change is to enable snoops for boot cluster. Internally, we
>> >>> were disabling the snoops for both the clusters at power off and
>> >>> enabling it in power_up_setup and power_up. However, I dropped the
>> >>> approach due to problems pointed out by Nicolas here
>> >>> http://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg324091.html related to
>> >>> cpuidle. Hence, we turn it on at the u-boot.
>> >>
>> >> I think I followed all that. What you're saying is that our kernel
>> >> dynamically enables and disables snoops as needed, but Nicolas pointed
>> >> out that it was unsafe (though apparently we're not seeing problems in
>> >> our usage).
>> > We did not see any problems as CPUIdle was one of the problematic
>> > scenarios which we have not got enabled.
>>
>> Ah, makes sense!
>>
>>
>>
>> I'm still trying to figure out all of this code, but we'll also need
>> to make sure whatever solution we come up with handles suspend/resume
>> properly. I know SRAM is lost across suspend/resume so someone
>> (either the SPL from read-only memory or the kernel) must be
>> recreating the SRAM structures after S2R...
>
>
> -Olof
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-06-06 20:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 51+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-06-06 1:08 Problems booting exynos5420 with >1 CPU Doug Anderson
2014-06-06 4:38 ` Tushar Behera
2014-06-06 17:17 ` Doug Anderson
2014-06-06 17:36 ` Abhilash Kesavan
2014-06-06 18:02 ` Doug Anderson
2014-06-06 18:12 ` Abhilash Kesavan
2014-06-06 18:20 ` Doug Anderson
2014-06-06 18:31 ` Abhilash Kesavan
2014-06-06 18:56 ` Doug Anderson
2014-06-06 19:09 ` Abhilash Kesavan
2014-06-06 19:12 ` Abhilash Kesavan
2014-06-06 20:49 ` Doug Anderson
2014-06-06 21:01 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2014-06-06 21:12 ` Doug Anderson
2014-06-06 21:44 ` Doug Anderson
2014-06-06 20:37 ` Olof Johansson
2014-06-06 20:46 ` Abhilash Kesavan [this message]
2014-06-06 21:01 ` Olof Johansson
2014-06-06 21:06 ` Abhilash Kesavan
2014-06-06 21:34 ` Nicolas Pitre
2014-06-06 21:49 ` Olof Johansson
2014-06-06 21:59 ` Doug Anderson
2014-06-06 22:38 ` Nicolas Pitre
2014-06-06 23:03 ` Doug Anderson
2014-06-06 22:17 ` Nicolas Pitre
2014-06-06 21:48 ` Nicolas Pitre
2014-06-07 3:25 ` Abhilash Kesavan
2014-06-07 16:10 ` Nicolas Pitre
2014-06-07 17:56 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2014-06-07 20:06 ` Nicolas Pitre
2014-06-07 22:36 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2014-06-07 23:53 ` Olof Johansson
2014-06-08 0:19 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2014-06-08 2:52 ` Olof Johansson
2014-06-08 18:26 ` Nicolas Pitre
2014-06-08 18:29 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2014-06-08 18:55 ` Nicolas Pitre
2014-06-08 19:02 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2014-06-08 12:45 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2014-06-08 14:34 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2014-06-08 17:53 ` Nicolas Pitre
2014-06-09 20:47 ` Kevin Hilman
2014-06-09 22:26 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2014-06-10 4:25 ` Nicolas Pitre
2014-06-10 9:19 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2014-06-10 14:14 ` Catalin Marinas
2014-06-10 16:49 ` Nicolas Pitre
2014-06-10 17:42 ` Catalin Marinas
2014-06-10 19:15 ` Nicolas Pitre
2014-06-09 20:27 ` Kevin Hilman
2014-06-09 20:35 ` Doug Anderson
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='CAM4voanSpTd=dAXLZhdZKRP4Z_YShbD4Hr-6UWn3DFYueoxeTA@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=kesavan.abhilash@gmail.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).