From: Wolfram Sang <wsa@the-dreams.de>
To: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
Cc: Jarkko Nikula <jarkko.nikula@linux.intel.com>,
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>,
Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, "H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org,
x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/3] x86: baytrail/cherrytrail: Rework and move P-Unit PMIC bus semaphore code
Date: Sun, 14 Oct 2018 15:17:24 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20181014131724.GA863@kunai> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20181011142911.13750-2-hdegoede@redhat.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2769 bytes --]
On Thu, Oct 11, 2018 at 04:29:09PM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote:
> On some BYT/CHT systems the SoC's P-Unit shares the I2C bus with the
> kernel. The P-Unit has a semaphore for the PMIC bus which we can take to
> block it from accessing the shared bus while the kernel wants to access it.
>
> Currently we have the I2C-controller driver acquiring and releasing the
> semaphore around each I2C transfer. There are 2 problems with this:
>
> 1) PMIC accesses often come in the form of a read-modify-write on one of
> the PMIC registers, we currently release the P-Unit's PMIC bus semaphore
> between the read and the write. If the P-Unit modifies the register during
> this window?, then we end up overwriting the P-Unit's changes.
> I believe that this is mostly an academic problem, but I'm not sure.
>
> 2) To safely access the shared I2C bus, we need to do 3 things:
> a) Notify the GPU driver that we are starting a window in which it may not
> access the P-Unit, since the P-Unit seems to ignore the semaphore for
> explicit power-level requests made by the GPU driver
> b) Make a pm_qos request to force all CPU cores out of C6/C7 since entering
> C6/C7 while we hold the semaphore hangs the SoC
> c) Finally take the P-Unit's PMIC bus semaphore
> All 3 these steps together are somewhat expensive, so ideally if we have
> a bunch of i2c transfers grouped together we only do this once for the
> entire group.
>
> Taking the read-modify-write on a PMIC register as example then ideally we
> would only do all 3 steps once at the beginning and undo all 3 steps once
> at the end.
>
> For this we need to be able to take the semaphore from within e.g. the PMIC
> opregion driver, yet we do not want to remove the taking of the semaphore
> from the I2C-controller driver, as that is still necessary to protect many
> other code-paths leading to accessing the shared I2C bus.
>
> This means that we first have the PMIC driver acquire the semaphore and
> then have the I2C controller driver trying to acquire it again.
>
> To make this possible this commit does the following:
>
> 1) Move the semaphore code from being private to the I2C controller driver
> into the generic iosf_mbi code, which already has other code to deal with
> the shared bus so that it can be accessed outside of the I2C bus driver.
>
> 2) Rework the code so that it can be called multiple times nested, while
> still blocking I2C accesses while e.g. the GPU driver has indicated the
> P-Unit needs the bus through a iosf_mbi_punit_acquire() call.
>
> Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
For the record: once the designware maintainers are okay with this
change, I am also okay with it going via the x86 platform tree.
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-10-14 13:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-10-11 14:29 [PATCH v3 0/3] x86: baytrail/cherrytrail: Rework and move P-Unit PMIC semaphore handling Hans de Goede
2018-10-11 14:29 ` [PATCH v3 1/3] x86: baytrail/cherrytrail: Rework and move P-Unit PMIC bus semaphore code Hans de Goede
2018-10-11 20:35 ` Alan Cox
2018-10-12 9:23 ` Hans de Goede
2018-10-12 17:08 ` Alan Cox
2018-10-14 13:17 ` Wolfram Sang [this message]
2018-10-15 14:15 ` Jarkko Nikula
2018-10-17 10:34 ` Wolfram Sang
2018-10-11 14:29 ` [PATCH v3 2/3] ACPI / PMIC: xpower: Block P-Unit I2C access during read-modify-write Hans de Goede
2018-10-11 14:29 ` [PATCH v3 3/3] i2c: designware: Cleanup bus lock handling Hans de Goede
2018-10-15 14:15 ` Jarkko Nikula
2018-10-18 8:03 ` Wolfram Sang
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=20181014131724.GA863@kunai \
--to=wsa@the-dreams.de \
--cc=andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com \
--cc=hdegoede@redhat.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=jarkko.nikula@linux.intel.com \
--cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=x86@kernel.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).