From: Cristian Marussi <cristian.marussi@arm.com>
To: Johan Hovold <johan@kernel.org>
Cc: Cristian Marussi <cristian.marussi@arm.com>,
Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@linaro.org>,
Sibi Sankar <quic_sibis@quicinc.com>,
sudeep.holla@arm.com, dmitry.baryshkov@linaro.org,
maz@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
arm-scmi@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, konradybcio@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC V6 2/2] firmware: arm_scmi: Add quirk to bypass SCP fw bug
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2025 13:29:19 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Z9l1L1WICMYXSoIu@pluto> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Z9kr5ABbqO27_BM-@hovoldconsulting.com>
On Tue, Mar 18, 2025 at 09:16:36AM +0100, Johan Hovold wrote:
> Hi Cristian,
Hi Johan,
>
> On Mon, Mar 03, 2025 at 11:53:52AM +0100, Johan Hovold wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 27, 2025 at 08:34:44AM +0000, Cristian Marussi wrote:
> > > On Wed, Feb 26, 2025 at 10:58:44AM +0100, Johan Hovold wrote:
> >
> > > > Something like that, yes. :) I didn't try to implement it, but it seems
> > > > like it should be possible implement this is a way that keeps the quirk
> > > > handling isolated.
> > >
> > > I hope next week to have a better look at this, in tne meantime just a
> > > few considerations....
> > >
> > > Sooner or later we should have introduced some sort of quirk framework
> > > in SCMI to deal systematically with potentially out-of-spec FW, but as
> > > in the name, it should be some sort of framework where you have a table of
> > > quirks, related activation conditions and a few very well isolated points
> > > where the quirks are placed and take action if enabled...this does not
> > > seem the case here where instead an ad-hoc param is added to the function
> > > that needs to be quirked...this does not scale and will make the codebase
> > > a mess IMHO...
> >
> > Sounds good. At least we have a good understanding now of how this
> > particular firmware is broken so it would be great if you could use
> > this as a test case for the implementation.
> >
> > In summary, we need to force the use of a fast channel for
> > PERF_LEVEL_GET on these machines, or possibly fall back to the current
> > behaviour of only using the domain attribute to determine whether the
> > fast channels should be initialised.
> >
> > The latter may allow for a less intrusive implementation even if we'd
> > still see:
> >
> > arm-scmi arm-scmi.0.auto: Failed to get FC for protocol 13 [MSG_ID:6 / RES_ID:0] - ret:-95. Using regular messaging.
> > arm-scmi arm-scmi.0.auto: Failed to get FC for protocol 13 [MSG_ID:6 / RES_ID:1] - ret:-95. Using regular messaging.
> > arm-scmi arm-scmi.0.auto: Failed to get FC for protocol 13 [MSG_ID:6 / RES_ID:2] - ret:-95. Using regular messaging.
> >
> > when not supported for all messages (e.g. with the current firmware).
>
> > > Anyway, after all of this babbling, I know, talk is cheap :D...so now I will shut
> > > up and see if I can prototype something generic to deal with quirks, possibly
> > > next week...
>
> Have you made any progress on the quirk framework prototyping?
>
I have not forgot, tried a few things, but nothing really to post as of
now...dont wnat to rush either .... I was hoping to push something out at
the end of this next merge window...
> Do you need any input from Sibi on the protocol versioning for that?
>
No I am fine, I am planning anyway for something generic enough to be
easy then to plug your own quirks separately...
> We'd really like to enable cpufreq on this platform and ideally in 6.15.
> I think that should be possible given that we now understand in what
> ways the firmware is broken and what is needed to handle it even if we
> still need to decide on how best to implement this.
>
v6.15 seems hard/impossible even using the original Sibi patch
given the usual upstreaming-timeline of the SCMI stack where everything has
to be usually reviewed and accepted by rc4/rc5.....so both Sibi initial
patch and my own babbling were alreaady sort of late.
Thanks,
Cristian
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-03-18 13:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-02-26 2:43 [RFC V6 0/2] firmware: arm_scmi: Misc Fixes Sibi Sankar
2025-02-26 2:43 ` [RFC V6 1/2] firmware: arm_scmi: Ensure that the message-id supports fastchannel Sibi Sankar
2025-02-26 2:43 ` [RFC V6 2/2] firmware: arm_scmi: Add quirk to bypass SCP fw bug Sibi Sankar
2025-02-26 8:10 ` Dan Carpenter
2025-02-26 8:12 ` Johan Hovold
2025-02-26 8:55 ` Johan Hovold
2025-02-26 9:31 ` Dan Carpenter
2025-02-26 9:58 ` Johan Hovold
2025-02-27 8:34 ` Cristian Marussi
2025-03-03 10:53 ` Johan Hovold
2025-03-18 8:16 ` Johan Hovold
2025-03-18 13:29 ` Cristian Marussi [this message]
2025-03-18 15:40 ` Johan Hovold
2025-02-27 8:03 ` Cristian Marussi
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=Z9l1L1WICMYXSoIu@pluto \
--to=cristian.marussi@arm.com \
--cc=arm-scmi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=dan.carpenter@linaro.org \
--cc=dmitry.baryshkov@linaro.org \
--cc=johan@kernel.org \
--cc=konradybcio@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=maz@kernel.org \
--cc=quic_sibis@quicinc.com \
--cc=sudeep.holla@arm.com \
/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).