From: Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@linaro.org>
To: Marc Gonzalez <marc.w.gonzalez@free.fr>
Cc: Kishon Vijay Abraham I <kishon@ti.com>,
MSM <linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Evan Green <evgreen@chromium.org>,
Vivek Gautam <vivek.gautam@codeaurora.org>,
Niklas Cassel <niklas.cassel@linaro.org>,
Stanimir Varbanov <svarbanov@mm-sol.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] phy: qcom-qmp: Correct READY_STATUS poll break condition
Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2019 10:25:01 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190612172501.GY4814@minitux> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <619d2559-6d88-e795-76e0-3078236933ef@free.fr>
On Wed 12 Jun 09:24 PDT 2019, Marc Gonzalez wrote:
> On 05/06/2019 01:24, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
>
> > After issuing a PHY_START request to the QMP, the hardware documentation
> > states that the software should wait for the PCS_READY_STATUS to become
> > 1.
> >
> > With the introduction of c9b589791fc1 ("phy: qcom: Utilize UFS reset
> > controller") an additional 1ms delay was introduced between the start
> > request and the check of the status bit. This greatly increases the
> > chances for the hardware to actually becoming ready before the status
> > bit is read.
> >
> > The result can be seen in that UFS PHY enabling is now reported as a
> > failure in 10% of the boots on SDM845, which is a clear regression from
> > the previous rare/occasional failure.
> >
> > This patch fixes the "break condition" of the poll to check for the
> > correct state of the status bit.
> >
> > Unfortunately PCIe on 8996 and 8998 does not specify the mask_pcs_ready
> > register, which means that the code checks a bit that's always 0. So the
> > patch also fixes these, in order to not regress these targets.
> >
> > Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
> > Cc: Evan Green <evgreen@chromium.org>
> > Cc: Marc Gonzalez <marc.w.gonzalez@free.fr>
> > Cc: Vivek Gautam <vivek.gautam@codeaurora.org>
> > Fixes: 73d7ec899bd8 ("phy: qcom-qmp: Add msm8998 PCIe QMP PHY support")
> > Fixes: e78f3d15e115 ("phy: qcom-qmp: new qmp phy driver for qcom-chipsets")
> > Signed-off-by: Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@linaro.org>
> > ---
> >
> > @Kishon, this is a regression spotted in v5.2-rc1, so please consider applying
> > this towards v5.2.
> >
> > drivers/phy/qualcomm/phy-qcom-qmp.c | 4 +++-
> > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/phy/qualcomm/phy-qcom-qmp.c b/drivers/phy/qualcomm/phy-qcom-qmp.c
> > index cd91b4179b10..43abdfd0deed 100644
> > --- a/drivers/phy/qualcomm/phy-qcom-qmp.c
> > +++ b/drivers/phy/qualcomm/phy-qcom-qmp.c
> > @@ -1074,6 +1074,7 @@ static const struct qmp_phy_cfg msm8996_pciephy_cfg = {
> >
> > .start_ctrl = PCS_START | PLL_READY_GATE_EN,
> > .pwrdn_ctrl = SW_PWRDN | REFCLK_DRV_DSBL,
> > + .mask_pcs_ready = PHYSTATUS,
> > .mask_com_pcs_ready = PCS_READY,
> >
> > .has_phy_com_ctrl = true,
> > @@ -1253,6 +1254,7 @@ static const struct qmp_phy_cfg msm8998_pciephy_cfg = {
> >
> > .start_ctrl = SERDES_START | PCS_START,
> > .pwrdn_ctrl = SW_PWRDN | REFCLK_DRV_DSBL,
> > + .mask_pcs_ready = PHYSTATUS,
> > .mask_com_pcs_ready = PCS_READY,
> > };
> >
> > @@ -1547,7 +1549,7 @@ static int qcom_qmp_phy_enable(struct phy *phy)
> > status = pcs + cfg->regs[QPHY_PCS_READY_STATUS];
> > mask = cfg->mask_pcs_ready;
> >
> > - ret = readl_poll_timeout(status, val, !(val & mask), 1,
> > + ret = readl_poll_timeout(status, val, val & mask, 1,
> > PHY_INIT_COMPLETE_TIMEOUT);
> > if (ret) {
> > dev_err(qmp->dev, "phy initialization timed-out\n");
>
> Your patch made me realize that:
> msm8998_pciephy_cfg.has_phy_com_ctrl = false
> thus
> msm8998_pciephy_cfg.mask_com_pcs_ready is useless, AFAICT.
>
While 8998 has a COM block, it does (among other things) not have a
ready bit. So afaict has_phy_com_ctrl = false is correct.
The addition of mask_pcs_ready is part of resolving the regression in
5.2, so I suggest that we remove mask_com_pcs_ready separately.
> (I copied msm8996_pciephy_cfg for msm8998_pciephy_cfg)
>
> Does msm8996_pciephy_cfg really need both mask_pcs_ready AND
> mask_com_pcs_ready?
>
8996 has a COM block and it contains both the control bits and the
status bits, so that looks correct.
> I'll test your patch tomorrow.
>
I appreciate that.
Thanks,
Bjorn
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-06-12 17:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-06-04 23:24 [PATCH] phy: qcom-qmp: Correct READY_STATUS poll break condition Bjorn Andersson
2019-06-04 23:35 ` Evan Green
2019-06-12 13:08 ` Niklas Cassel
2019-06-12 17:34 ` Bjorn Andersson
2019-06-12 16:24 ` Marc Gonzalez
2019-06-12 17:25 ` Bjorn Andersson [this message]
2019-06-13 9:10 ` Marc Gonzalez
2019-06-19 12:43 ` Marc Gonzalez
2019-07-19 15:50 ` Marc Gonzalez
2019-07-23 10:31 ` Marc Gonzalez
2019-08-02 19:54 ` Marc Gonzalez
2019-08-06 0:43 ` Bjorn Andersson
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=20190612172501.GY4814@minitux \
--to=bjorn.andersson@linaro.org \
--cc=evgreen@chromium.org \
--cc=kishon@ti.com \
--cc=linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=marc.w.gonzalez@free.fr \
--cc=niklas.cassel@linaro.org \
--cc=svarbanov@mm-sol.com \
--cc=vivek.gautam@codeaurora.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).