From: Felipe Balbi <balbi@ti.com>
To: "Datta, Shubhrajyoti" <shubhrajyoti@ti.com>
Cc: Kevin Hilman <khilman@ti.com>,
linux-omap <linux-omap@vger.kernel.org>,
NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de>, Russ Dill <russ.dill@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: debug needed: twl4030 RTC wakeups: repeated attempts fail on Beagle
Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2012 21:42:14 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120822184211.GA29041@arwen.pp.htv.fi> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CANQgH-a9uiaUnR+G2Y_zzvvS3+Yh-O3b-afkZDsNkQFBWNN+9g@mail.gmail.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3025 bytes --]
Hi,
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 08:36:31PM +0530, Datta, Shubhrajyoti wrote:
> > The real mystery is why this happens on Beagle and Beagle-xM, but none
> > of the other OMAP3 boards (at least the ones I have.)
>
> Looks like some race/ timing issue.
> However I am not sure what is a good way to synchronise the i2c
> requests from a client from an isr and
> the device disable / runtime resumed.
>
> However on merging the clean up series
>
> http://www.mail-archive.com/linux-omap@vger.kernel.org/msg73870.html
>
> Didn't see the above mentioned issue.
>
> but there were some error's like timeout.
>
> This may be because the controller was not fully enabled.
>
> SYSC in case of I2C not only reflects the reset status from sysc
> reset( register is reset)
> but also controller enable ( controller reset ).
>
> On checking the reset after controller didnt see the time out issue.
>
> patch below.
>
>
>
> diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-omap.c b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-omap.c
> index 9aefd36..b35afa4 100644
> --- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-omap.c
> +++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-omap.c
> @@ -1254,6 +1254,7 @@ static int omap_i2c_runtime_resume(struct device *dev)
> {
> struct platform_device *pdev = to_platform_device(dev);
> struct omap_i2c_dev *_dev = platform_get_drvdata(pdev);
> + unsigned long timeout = 10000;
>
> if (_dev->flags & OMAP_I2C_FLAG_RESET_REGS_POSTIDLE) {
> omap_i2c_write_reg(_dev, OMAP_I2C_CON_REG, 0);
> @@ -1266,6 +1267,15 @@ static int omap_i2c_runtime_resume(struct device *dev)
> omap_i2c_write_reg(_dev, OMAP_I2C_CON_REG, OMAP_I2C_CON_EN);
> }
>
> + while (!(omap_i2c_read_reg(_dev, OMAP_I2C_SYSS_REG) &
> + SYSS_RESETDONE_MASK)) {
> + if (time_after(jiffies, timeout)) {
> + dev_warn(dev, "timeout waiting for controller reset\n");
> + return -ETIMEDOUT;
> + }
> + msleep(1);
> + }
> +
> /*
> * Don't write to this register if the IE state is 0 as it can
> * cause deadlock.
That's weird. i2c has SYSS_HAS_RESET_STATUS set, so hwmod framework
should be checking that for us. And, in fact, SYSS_HAS_RESET_STATUS is
set on all *data.c files.
When you wrote that patch, did you check that reset hasn't completed
yet ? I mean, was reset still asserted at that time ? If instead of your
patch, you just wait longer for reset to complete, will it work ?
diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_hwmod.c b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_hwmod.c
index 6ca8e51..7a39c72 100644
--- a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_hwmod.c
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_hwmod.c
@@ -156,7 +156,7 @@
#include "pm.h"
/* Maximum microseconds to wait for OMAP module to softreset */
-#define MAX_MODULE_SOFTRESET_WAIT 10000
+#define MAX_MODULE_SOFTRESET_WAIT 50000
/* Name of the OMAP hwmod for the MPU */
#define MPU_INITIATOR_NAME "mpu"
If it does, then reset takes longer to complete on those particular
boards and it would be nice to know why, but one step at a time :-)
--
balbi
[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-08-22 18:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-08-10 18:49 debug needed: twl4030 RTC wakeups: repeated attempts fail on Beagle Kevin Hilman
2012-08-10 22:27 ` NeilBrown
2012-08-13 18:24 ` Kevin Hilman
2012-08-22 15:06 ` Datta, Shubhrajyoti
2012-08-22 18:42 ` Felipe Balbi [this message]
2012-08-23 11:21 ` Shubhrajyoti
2012-08-23 11:33 ` Felipe Balbi
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=20120822184211.GA29041@arwen.pp.htv.fi \
--to=balbi@ti.com \
--cc=khilman@ti.com \
--cc=linux-omap@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=neilb@suse.de \
--cc=russ.dill@gmail.com \
--cc=shubhrajyoti@ti.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