[PATCH] ARM: rockchip: add reboot notifier

[PATCH] ARM: rockchip: add reboot notifier

[Andy Yan]

rockchip platform have a protocol to pass the the kernel
reboot mode to bootloader by some special registers when
system reboot.By this way the bootloader can take different
action according to the different kernel reboot mode, for
example, command "reboot loader" will reboot the board to
rockusb mode, this is a very convenient way to get the board
to download mode.

Signed-off-by: Andy Yan <andy.yan@rock-chips.com>
---

 arch/arm/mach-rockchip/Makefile |   2 +-
 arch/arm/mach-rockchip/loader.h |  22 +++++++++
 arch/arm/mach-rockchip/reboot.c | 103 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 3 files changed, 126 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
 create mode 100644 arch/arm/mach-rockchip/loader.h
 create mode 100644 arch/arm/mach-rockchip/reboot.c

diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/Makefile b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/Makefile
index 5c3a9b2..cd291e3 100644
--- a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/Makefile
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/Makefile
@@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
 CFLAGS_platsmp.o := -march=armv7-a
 
-obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_ROCKCHIP) += rockchip.o
+obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_ROCKCHIP) += rockchip.o reboot.o
 obj-$(CONFIG_PM_SLEEP) += pm.o sleep.o
 obj-$(CONFIG_SMP) += headsmp.o platsmp.o
diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/loader.h b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/loader.h
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..bf51baa
--- /dev/null
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/loader.h
@@ -0,0 +1,22 @@
+#ifndef __MACH_ROCKCHIP_LOADER_H
+#define __MACH_ROCKCHIP_LOADER_H
+
+/*high 24 bits is tag, low 8 bits is type*/
+#define SYS_LOADER_REBOOT_FLAG   0x5242C300
+
+enum {
+	BOOT_NORMAL = 0, /* normal boot */
+	BOOT_LOADER,     /* enter loader rockusb mode */
+	BOOT_MASKROM,    /* enter maskrom rockusb mode (not support now) */
+	BOOT_RECOVER,    /* enter recover */
+	BOOT_NORECOVER,  /* do not enter recover */
+	BOOT_SECONDOS,   /* boot second OS (not support now)*/
+	BOOT_WIPEDATA,   /* enter recover and wipe data. */
+	BOOT_WIPEALL,    /* enter recover and wipe all data. */
+	BOOT_CHECKIMG,   /* check firmware img with backup part*/
+	BOOT_FASTBOOT,   /* enter fast boot mode */
+	BOOT_SECUREBOOT_DISABLE,
+	BOOT_CHARGING,   /* enter charge mode */
+	BOOT_MAX         /* MAX VALID BOOT TYPE.*/
+};
+#endif
diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/reboot.c b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/reboot.c
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..704bc16
--- /dev/null
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/reboot.c
@@ -0,0 +1,103 @@
+#include <linux/init.h>
+#include <linux/module.h>
+#include <linux/kernel.h>
+#include <linux/of.h>
+#include <linux/of_address.h>
+#include <linux/reboot.h>
+#include <linux/regmap.h>
+#include <linux/mfd/syscon.h>
+#include "loader.h"
+
+#define RK3188_PMU_SYS_REG0             0x40
+#define RK3288_PMU_SYS_REG0             0x94
+
+struct regmap *regmap;
+int flag_reg;
+
+static int rockchip_get_pmu_regmap(void)
+{
+	struct device_node *node;
+
+	node = of_find_node_by_path("/cpus");
+
+	regmap = syscon_regmap_lookup_by_phandle(node, "rockchip,pmu");
+	of_node_put(node);
+	if (!IS_ERR(regmap))
+		return 0;
+
+	regmap = syscon_regmap_lookup_by_compatible("rockchip,rk3066-pmu");
+	of_node_put(node);
+	if (!IS_ERR(regmap))
+		return 0;
+
+	return -ENODEV;
+}
+
+static int rockchip_get_reboot_flag_regmap(void)
+{
+	int ret = rockchip_get_pmu_regmap();
+
+	if (ret < 0)
+		return ret;
+
+	if (of_machine_is_compatible("rockchip,rk3288")) {
+		flag_reg = RK3288_PMU_SYS_REG0;
+		return 0;
+	} else if (of_machine_is_compatible("rockchip,rk3066a") ||
+		   of_machine_is_compatible("rockchip,rk3066b") ||
+		   of_machine_is_compatible("rockchip,rk3188")) {
+		flag_reg = RK3188_PMU_SYS_REG0;
+		return 0;
+	}
+
+	return -ENODEV;
+}
+
+static void rockchip_get_reboot_flag(const char *cmd, u32 *flag)
+{
+	*flag = SYS_LOADER_REBOOT_FLAG + BOOT_NORMAL;
+
+	if (cmd) {
+		if (!strcmp(cmd, "loader") || !strcmp(cmd, "bootloader"))
+			*flag = SYS_LOADER_REBOOT_FLAG + BOOT_LOADER;
+		else if (!strcmp(cmd, "recovery"))
+			*flag = SYS_LOADER_REBOOT_FLAG + BOOT_RECOVER;
+		else if (!strcmp(cmd, "charge"))
+			*flag = SYS_LOADER_REBOOT_FLAG + BOOT_CHARGING;
+	}
+}
+
+static int rockchip_reboot_notify(struct notifier_block *this,
+				  unsigned long mode, void *cmd)
+{
+	u32 flag;
+
+	rockchip_get_reboot_flag(cmd, &flag);
+	regmap_write(regmap, flag_reg, flag);
+
+	return NOTIFY_DONE;
+}
+
+static struct notifier_block rockchip_reboot_handler = {
+	.notifier_call = rockchip_reboot_notify,
+	.priority = 150,
+};
+
+static int __init rockchip_reboot_init(void)
+{
+	int ret = 0;
+
+	if (!rockchip_get_reboot_flag_regmap()) {
+		ret = register_restart_handler(&rockchip_reboot_handler);
+		if (ret)
+			pr_err("%s: cannot register reboot handler, %d\n",
+			       __func__, ret);
+	}
+
+return ret;
+}
+
+module_init(rockchip_reboot_init);
+MODULE_AUTHOR("Andy Yan <andy.yan@rock-chips.com");
+MODULE_DESCRIPTION("Rockchip platform reboot notifier driver");
+MODULE_LICENSE("GPL");
-- 
1.9.1

Re: [PATCH] ARM: rockchip: add reboot notifier

[Alexey Klimov]

Hi Andy,

On Tue, Sep 8, 2015 at 3:43 PM, Andy Yan <andy.yan@rock-chips.com> wrote:
> rockchip platform have a protocol to pass the the kernel

Double 'the'?

> reboot mode to bootloader by some special registers when
> system reboot. By this way the bootloader can take different
> action according to the different kernel reboot mode, for
> example, command "reboot loader" will reboot the board to
> rockusb mode, this is a very convenient way to get the board
> to download mode.
>
> Signed-off-by: Andy Yan <andy.yan@rock-chips.com>
> ---
>
>  arch/arm/mach-rockchip/Makefile |   2 +-
>  arch/arm/mach-rockchip/loader.h |  22 +++++++++
>  arch/arm/mach-rockchip/reboot.c | 103 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  3 files changed, 126 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>  create mode 100644 arch/arm/mach-rockchip/loader.h
>  create mode 100644 arch/arm/mach-rockchip/reboot.c
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/Makefile b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/Makefile
> index 5c3a9b2..cd291e3 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/Makefile
> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/Makefile
> @@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
>  CFLAGS_platsmp.o := -march=armv7-a
>
> -obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_ROCKCHIP) += rockchip.o
> +obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_ROCKCHIP) += rockchip.o reboot.o
>  obj-$(CONFIG_PM_SLEEP) += pm.o sleep.o
>  obj-$(CONFIG_SMP) += headsmp.o platsmp.o
> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/loader.h b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/loader.h
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..bf51baa
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/loader.h
> @@ -0,0 +1,22 @@
> +#ifndef __MACH_ROCKCHIP_LOADER_H
> +#define __MACH_ROCKCHIP_LOADER_H
> +
> +/*high 24 bits is tag, low 8 bits is type*/
> +#define SYS_LOADER_REBOOT_FLAG   0x5242C300
> +
> +enum {
> +       BOOT_NORMAL = 0, /* normal boot */
> +       BOOT_LOADER,     /* enter loader rockusb mode */
> +       BOOT_MASKROM,    /* enter maskrom rockusb mode (not support now) */
> +       BOOT_RECOVER,    /* enter recover */
> +       BOOT_NORECOVER,  /* do not enter recover */
> +       BOOT_SECONDOS,   /* boot second OS (not support now)*/
> +       BOOT_WIPEDATA,   /* enter recover and wipe data. */
> +       BOOT_WIPEALL,    /* enter recover and wipe all data. */
> +       BOOT_CHECKIMG,   /* check firmware img with backup part*/
> +       BOOT_FASTBOOT,   /* enter fast boot mode */
> +       BOOT_SECUREBOOT_DISABLE,
> +       BOOT_CHARGING,   /* enter charge mode */
> +       BOOT_MAX         /* MAX VALID BOOT TYPE.*/

Looks like you only implemented NORMAL, RECOVER, LOADER and CHARGING.
Are you keeping other entries for keeping right order and keep
consistency?
Or have plans for future?

> +};
> +#endif
> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/reboot.c b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/reboot.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..704bc16
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/reboot.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,103 @@
> +#include <linux/init.h>

Usually people place in the beginning copyright and GPL license header info.

> +#include <linux/module.h>
> +#include <linux/kernel.h>
> +#include <linux/of.h>
> +#include <linux/of_address.h>
> +#include <linux/reboot.h>
> +#include <linux/regmap.h>
> +#include <linux/mfd/syscon.h>
> +#include "loader.h"
> +
> +#define RK3188_PMU_SYS_REG0             0x40
> +#define RK3288_PMU_SYS_REG0             0x94
> +
> +struct regmap *regmap;
> +int flag_reg;
> +
> +static int rockchip_get_pmu_regmap(void)
> +{
> +       struct device_node *node;
> +
> +       node = of_find_node_by_path("/cpus");

Is it critical not to check node for NULL here?

> +       regmap = syscon_regmap_lookup_by_phandle(node, "rockchip,pmu");
> +       of_node_put(node);
> +       if (!IS_ERR(regmap))
> +               return 0;
> +
> +       regmap = syscon_regmap_lookup_by_compatible("rockchip,rk3066-pmu");
> +       of_node_put(node);
> +       if (!IS_ERR(regmap))
> +               return 0;
> +
> +       return -ENODEV;
> +}

This double of_node_put(node) confuses me. Could you please guide me over it?

After I tried to re-create it by myself looking to code I think that
second of_node_put() is not needed.

> +static int rockchip_get_reboot_flag_regmap(void)
> +{
> +       int ret = rockchip_get_pmu_regmap();
> +
> +       if (ret < 0)
> +               return ret;
> +
> +       if (of_machine_is_compatible("rockchip,rk3288")) {
> +               flag_reg = RK3288_PMU_SYS_REG0;
> +               return 0;
> +       } else if (of_machine_is_compatible("rockchip,rk3066a") ||
> +                  of_machine_is_compatible("rockchip,rk3066b") ||
> +                  of_machine_is_compatible("rockchip,rk3188")) {
> +               flag_reg = RK3188_PMU_SYS_REG0;
> +               return 0;
> +       }
> +
> +       return -ENODEV;

[..]

> +
> +static int __init rockchip_reboot_init(void)
> +{
> +       int ret = 0;
> +
> +       if (!rockchip_get_reboot_flag_regmap()) {
> +               ret = register_restart_handler(&rockchip_reboot_handler);
> +               if (ret)
> +                       pr_err("%s: cannot register reboot handler, %d\n",
> +                              __func__, ret);
> +       }
> +
> +return ret;

Please align this correctly.

Thanks,
Alexey Klimov

Re: [PATCH] ARM: rockchip: add reboot notifier

[Andy Yan]

Hi Alexey:

On 2015年09月09日 05:50, Alexey Klimov wrote:
> Hi Andy,
>
> On Tue, Sep 8, 2015 at 3:43 PM, Andy Yan <andy.yan@rock-chips.com> wrote:
>> rockchip platform have a protocol to pass the the kernel
> Double 'the'?
    this is will be removed.
>
>> reboot mode to bootloader by some special registers when
>> system reboot. By this way the bootloader can take different
>> action according to the different kernel reboot mode, for
>> example, command "reboot loader" will reboot the board to
>> rockusb mode, this is a very convenient way to get the board
>> to download mode.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Andy Yan <andy.yan@rock-chips.com>
>> ---
>>
>>   arch/arm/mach-rockchip/Makefile |   2 +-
>>   arch/arm/mach-rockchip/loader.h |  22 +++++++++
>>   arch/arm/mach-rockchip/reboot.c | 103 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>   3 files changed, 126 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>   create mode 100644 arch/arm/mach-rockchip/loader.h
>>   create mode 100644 arch/arm/mach-rockchip/reboot.c
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/Makefile b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/Makefile
>> index 5c3a9b2..cd291e3 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/Makefile
>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/Makefile
>> @@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
>>   CFLAGS_platsmp.o := -march=armv7-a
>>
>> -obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_ROCKCHIP) += rockchip.o
>> +obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_ROCKCHIP) += rockchip.o reboot.o
>>   obj-$(CONFIG_PM_SLEEP) += pm.o sleep.o
>>   obj-$(CONFIG_SMP) += headsmp.o platsmp.o
>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/loader.h b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/loader.h
>> new file mode 100644
>> index 0000000..bf51baa
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/loader.h
>> @@ -0,0 +1,22 @@
>> +#ifndef __MACH_ROCKCHIP_LOADER_H
>> +#define __MACH_ROCKCHIP_LOADER_H
>> +
>> +/*high 24 bits is tag, low 8 bits is type*/
>> +#define SYS_LOADER_REBOOT_FLAG   0x5242C300
>> +
>> +enum {
>> +       BOOT_NORMAL = 0, /* normal boot */
>> +       BOOT_LOADER,     /* enter loader rockusb mode */
>> +       BOOT_MASKROM,    /* enter maskrom rockusb mode (not support now) */
>> +       BOOT_RECOVER,    /* enter recover */
>> +       BOOT_NORECOVER,  /* do not enter recover */
>> +       BOOT_SECONDOS,   /* boot second OS (not support now)*/
>> +       BOOT_WIPEDATA,   /* enter recover and wipe data. */
>> +       BOOT_WIPEALL,    /* enter recover and wipe all data. */
>> +       BOOT_CHECKIMG,   /* check firmware img with backup part*/
>> +       BOOT_FASTBOOT,   /* enter fast boot mode */
>> +       BOOT_SECUREBOOT_DISABLE,
>> +       BOOT_CHARGING,   /* enter charge mode */
>> +       BOOT_MAX         /* MAX VALID BOOT TYPE.*/
> Looks like you only implemented NORMAL, RECOVER, LOADER and CHARGING.
> Are you keeping other entries for keeping right order and keep
> consistency?
> Or have plans for future?
    to keep the right order,some of them maybe implemented in
    the future.
>
>> +};
>> +#endif
>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/reboot.c b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/reboot.c
>> new file mode 100644
>> index 0000000..704bc16
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/reboot.c
>> @@ -0,0 +1,103 @@
>> +#include <linux/init.h>
> Usually people place in the beginning copyright and GPL license header info.
>
>> +#include <linux/module.h>
>> +#include <linux/kernel.h>
>> +#include <linux/of.h>
>> +#include <linux/of_address.h>
>> +#include <linux/reboot.h>
>> +#include <linux/regmap.h>
>> +#include <linux/mfd/syscon.h>
>> +#include "loader.h"
>> +
>> +#define RK3188_PMU_SYS_REG0             0x40
>> +#define RK3288_PMU_SYS_REG0             0x94
>> +
>> +struct regmap *regmap;
>> +int flag_reg;
>> +
>> +static int rockchip_get_pmu_regmap(void)
>> +{
>> +       struct device_node *node;
>> +
>> +       node = of_find_node_by_path("/cpus");
> Is it critical not to check node for NULL here?
    ok, I will add a check here
>
>> +       regmap = syscon_regmap_lookup_by_phandle(node, "rockchip,pmu");
>> +       of_node_put(node);
>> +       if (!IS_ERR(regmap))
>> +               return 0;
>> +
>> +       regmap = syscon_regmap_lookup_by_compatible("rockchip,rk3066-pmu");
>> +       of_node_put(node);
>> +       if (!IS_ERR(regmap))
>> +               return 0;
>> +
>> +       return -ENODEV;
>> +}
> This double of_node_put(node) confuses me. Could you please guide me over it?
>
> After I tried to re-create it by myself looking to code I think that
> second of_node_put() is not needed.

    the second of_node_put is not needed, it will be removed.
>> +static int rockchip_get_reboot_flag_regmap(void)
>> +{
>> +       int ret = rockchip_get_pmu_regmap();
>> +
>> +       if (ret < 0)
>> +               return ret;
>> +
>> +       if (of_machine_is_compatible("rockchip,rk3288")) {
>> +               flag_reg = RK3288_PMU_SYS_REG0;
>> +               return 0;
>> +       } else if (of_machine_is_compatible("rockchip,rk3066a") ||
>> +                  of_machine_is_compatible("rockchip,rk3066b") ||
>> +                  of_machine_is_compatible("rockchip,rk3188")) {
>> +               flag_reg = RK3188_PMU_SYS_REG0;
>> +               return 0;
>> +       }
>> +
>> +       return -ENODEV;
> [..]
>
>> +
>> +static int __init rockchip_reboot_init(void)
>> +{
>> +       int ret = 0;
>> +
>> +       if (!rockchip_get_reboot_flag_regmap()) {
>> +               ret = register_restart_handler(&rockchip_reboot_handler);
>> +               if (ret)
>> +                       pr_err("%s: cannot register reboot handler, %d\n",
>> +                              __func__, ret);
>> +       }
>> +
>> +return ret;
> Please align this correctly.
    OK, this will be aligned next version
>
> Thanks,
> Alexey Klimov
>
>
>
   Thanks for your review.

set rockchip-specific uboot bootmode flags on reboot (was: [PATCH] ARM: rockchip: add reboot notifier)

[Heiko Stübner]

Hi Andy,

Am Dienstag, 8. September 2015, 20:43:07 schrieb Andy Yan:
> rockchip platform have a protocol to pass the the kernel
> reboot mode to bootloader by some special registers when
> system reboot.By this way the bootloader can take different
> action according to the different kernel reboot mode, for
> example, command "reboot loader" will reboot the board to
> rockusb mode, this is a very convenient way to get the board
> to download mode.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Andy Yan <andy.yan@rock-chips.com>

[...]

> @@ -0,0 +1,22 @@
> +#ifndef __MACH_ROCKCHIP_LOADER_H
> +#define __MACH_ROCKCHIP_LOADER_H
> +
> +/*high 24 bits is tag, low 8 bits is type*/
> +#define SYS_LOADER_REBOOT_FLAG   0x5242C300
> +
> +enum {
> +	BOOT_NORMAL = 0, /* normal boot */
> +	BOOT_LOADER,     /* enter loader rockusb mode */
> +	BOOT_MASKROM,    /* enter maskrom rockusb mode (not support now) */
> +	BOOT_RECOVER,    /* enter recover */
> +	BOOT_NORECOVER,  /* do not enter recover */
> +	BOOT_SECONDOS,   /* boot second OS (not support now)*/
> +	BOOT_WIPEDATA,   /* enter recover and wipe data. */
> +	BOOT_WIPEALL,    /* enter recover and wipe all data. */
> +	BOOT_CHECKIMG,   /* check firmware img with backup part*/
> +	BOOT_FASTBOOT,   /* enter fast boot mode */
> +	BOOT_SECUREBOOT_DISABLE,
> +	BOOT_CHARGING,   /* enter charge mode */
> +	BOOT_MAX         /* MAX VALID BOOT TYPE.*/
> +};
> +#endif

These flags rely on code in the bootloader to actually handle the target 
action. Nowadays this is uboot, but still a rockchip-specific fork. And we're 
actively moving away from that, with the recent rk3288 addition to mainline 
uboot. 

So unless you convince uboot people that the _underlying special 
functionality_ behind these flags should be part of uboot, I don't think this 
is going to fly.


In a way this is similar to gpu kernel code talking to proprietary userspace 
libs - these are also not eligible for the kernel. (meaning stuff like the 
mali kernel driver not being allowed). 

[...]

> +static int rockchip_reboot_notify(struct notifier_block *this,
> +				  unsigned long mode, void *cmd)
> +{
> +	u32 flag;
> +
> +	rockchip_get_reboot_flag(cmd, &flag);
> +	regmap_write(regmap, flag_reg, flag);
> +
> +	return NOTIFY_DONE;
> +}
> +
> +static struct notifier_block rockchip_reboot_handler = {
> +	.notifier_call = rockchip_reboot_notify,
> +	.priority = 150,
> +};

the restart handlers are meant to really only restart the system, not to 
execute some actions before the restart happens.

See https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/6/3/707 for a similar case.


Heiko

Re: set rockchip-specific uboot bootmode flags on reboot

[Andy Yan]

Hi Heiko:

On 2015年09月09日 06:46, Heiko Stübner wrote:
> Hi Andy,
>
> Am Dienstag, 8. September 2015, 20:43:07 schrieb Andy Yan:
>> rockchip platform have a protocol to pass the the kernel
>> reboot mode to bootloader by some special registers when
>> system reboot.By this way the bootloader can take different
>> action according to the different kernel reboot mode, for
>> example, command "reboot loader" will reboot the board to
>> rockusb mode, this is a very convenient way to get the board
>> to download mode.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Andy Yan<andy.yan@rock-chips.com>
> [...]
>
>> @@ -0,0 +1,22 @@
>> +#ifndef __MACH_ROCKCHIP_LOADER_H
>> +#define __MACH_ROCKCHIP_LOADER_H
>> +
>> +/*high 24 bits is tag, low 8 bits is type*/
>> +#define SYS_LOADER_REBOOT_FLAG   0x5242C300
>> +
>> +enum {
>> +	BOOT_NORMAL = 0, /* normal boot */
>> +	BOOT_LOADER,     /* enter loader rockusb mode */
>> +	BOOT_MASKROM,    /* enter maskrom rockusb mode (not support now) */
>> +	BOOT_RECOVER,    /* enter recover */
>> +	BOOT_NORECOVER,  /* do not enter recover */
>> +	BOOT_SECONDOS,   /* boot second OS (not support now)*/
>> +	BOOT_WIPEDATA,   /* enter recover and wipe data. */
>> +	BOOT_WIPEALL,    /* enter recover and wipe all data. */
>> +	BOOT_CHECKIMG,   /* check firmware img with backup part*/
>> +	BOOT_FASTBOOT,   /* enter fast boot mode */
>> +	BOOT_SECUREBOOT_DISABLE,
>> +	BOOT_CHARGING,   /* enter charge mode */
>> +	BOOT_MAX         /* MAX VALID BOOT TYPE.*/
>> +};
>> +#endif
> These flags rely on code in the bootloader to actually handle the target
> action. Nowadays this is uboot, but still a rockchip-specific fork. And we're
> actively moving away from that, with the recent rk3288 addition to mainline
> uboot.
   Sorry, I don't know about this action before, but this is really a 
very convenient way
   to get machine enter download mode, it seems that many Android devices
   have this function to support commands like "reboot recovery", 
"reboot fastboot".
   Why should we moving away from that?
> So unless you convince uboot people that the _underlying special
> functionality_ behind these flags should be part of uboot, I don't think this
> is going to fly.
>
>
> In a way this is similar to gpu kernel code talking to proprietary userspace
> libs - these are also not eligible for the kernel. (meaning stuff like the
> mali kernel driver not being allowed).
>
> [...]
>
>> +static int rockchip_reboot_notify(struct notifier_block *this,
>> +				  unsigned long mode, void *cmd)
>> +{
>> +	u32 flag;
>> +
>> +	rockchip_get_reboot_flag(cmd, &flag);
>> +	regmap_write(regmap, flag_reg, flag);
>> +
>> +	return NOTIFY_DONE;
>> +}
>> +
>> +static struct notifier_block rockchip_reboot_handler = {
>> +	.notifier_call = rockchip_reboot_notify,
>> +	.priority = 150,
>> +};
> the restart handlers are meant to really only restart the system, not to
> execute some actions before the restart happens.
>
> Seehttps://lkml.org/lkml/2015/6/3/707  for a similar case.
>
    So maybe I can use reboot notifier here?
   Thank you.
> Heiko
>
>
>

Re: set rockchip-specific uboot bootmode flags on reboot (was: [PATCH] ARM: rockchip: add reboot notifier)

[Simon Glass]

Hi,

On 8 September 2015 at 16:46, Heiko Stübner <heiko@sntech.de> wrote:
>
> Hi Andy,
>
> Am Dienstag, 8. September 2015, 20:43:07 schrieb Andy Yan:
> > rockchip platform have a protocol to pass the the kernel
> > reboot mode to bootloader by some special registers when
> > system reboot.By this way the bootloader can take different
> > action according to the different kernel reboot mode, for
> > example, command "reboot loader" will reboot the board to
> > rockusb mode, this is a very convenient way to get the board
> > to download mode.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Andy Yan <andy.yan@rock-chips.com>
>
> [...]
>
> > @@ -0,0 +1,22 @@
> > +#ifndef __MACH_ROCKCHIP_LOADER_H
> > +#define __MACH_ROCKCHIP_LOADER_H
> > +
> > +/*high 24 bits is tag, low 8 bits is type*/
> > +#define SYS_LOADER_REBOOT_FLAG   0x5242C300
> > +
> > +enum {
> > +     BOOT_NORMAL = 0, /* normal boot */
> > +     BOOT_LOADER,     /* enter loader rockusb mode */
> > +     BOOT_MASKROM,    /* enter maskrom rockusb mode (not support now) */
> > +     BOOT_RECOVER,    /* enter recover */
> > +     BOOT_NORECOVER,  /* do not enter recover */
> > +     BOOT_SECONDOS,   /* boot second OS (not support now)*/
> > +     BOOT_WIPEDATA,   /* enter recover and wipe data. */
> > +     BOOT_WIPEALL,    /* enter recover and wipe all data. */
> > +     BOOT_CHECKIMG,   /* check firmware img with backup part*/
> > +     BOOT_FASTBOOT,   /* enter fast boot mode */
> > +     BOOT_SECUREBOOT_DISABLE,
> > +     BOOT_CHARGING,   /* enter charge mode */
> > +     BOOT_MAX         /* MAX VALID BOOT TYPE.*/
> > +};
> > +#endif
>
> These flags rely on code in the bootloader to actually handle the target
> action. Nowadays this is uboot, but still a rockchip-specific fork. And we're
> actively moving away from that, with the recent rk3288 addition to mainline
> uboot.
>
> So unless you convince uboot people that the _underlying special
> functionality_ behind these flags should be part of uboot, I don't think this
> is going to fly.
>
>
> In a way this is similar to gpu kernel code talking to proprietary userspace
> libs - these are also not eligible for the kernel. (meaning stuff like the
> mali kernel driver not being allowed).

I don't want to comment on what Linux does or does not want. But I can
see this sort of feature being useful for devs at least. So long as it
is defined in a way that is not Rockchip-specific (and the above enum
looks pretty reasonable on that front, I think it makes sense.

Of course it's a bit odd to target a downstream U-Boot with a Linux
feature. But hopefully Rockchip's U-Boot support and development will
move to mainline with time.

>
> [...]
>
> > +static int rockchip_reboot_notify(struct notifier_block *this,
> > +                               unsigned long mode, void *cmd)
> > +{
> > +     u32 flag;
> > +
> > +     rockchip_get_reboot_flag(cmd, &flag);
> > +     regmap_write(regmap, flag_reg, flag);
> > +
> > +     return NOTIFY_DONE;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static struct notifier_block rockchip_reboot_handler = {
> > +     .notifier_call = rockchip_reboot_notify,
> > +     .priority = 150,
> > +};
>
> the restart handlers are meant to really only restart the system, not to
> execute some actions before the restart happens.
>
> See https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/6/3/707 for a similar case.
>
>
> Heiko

Regards,
Simon

_______________________________________________
Linux-rockchip mailing list
Linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-rockchip

Re: set rockchip-specific uboot bootmode flags on reboot

[Andy Yan]

Hi Heiko:


On 2015年09月10日 02:05, Simon Glass wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 8 September 2015 at 16:46, Heiko Stübner <heiko@sntech.de> wrote:
>> Hi Andy,
>>
>> Am Dienstag, 8. September 2015, 20:43:07 schrieb Andy Yan:
>>> rockchip platform have a protocol to pass the the kernel
>>> reboot mode to bootloader by some special registers when
>>> system reboot.By this way the bootloader can take different
>>> action according to the different kernel reboot mode, for
>>> example, command "reboot loader" will reboot the board to
>>> rockusb mode, this is a very convenient way to get the board
>>> to download mode.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Andy Yan <andy.yan@rock-chips.com>
>> [...]
>>
>>> @@ -0,0 +1,22 @@
>>> +#ifndef __MACH_ROCKCHIP_LOADER_H
>>> +#define __MACH_ROCKCHIP_LOADER_H
>>> +
>>> +/*high 24 bits is tag, low 8 bits is type*/
>>> +#define SYS_LOADER_REBOOT_FLAG   0x5242C300
>>> +
>>> +enum {
>>> +     BOOT_NORMAL = 0, /* normal boot */
>>> +     BOOT_LOADER,     /* enter loader rockusb mode */
>>> +     BOOT_MASKROM,    /* enter maskrom rockusb mode (not support now) */
>>> +     BOOT_RECOVER,    /* enter recover */
>>> +     BOOT_NORECOVER,  /* do not enter recover */
>>> +     BOOT_SECONDOS,   /* boot second OS (not support now)*/
>>> +     BOOT_WIPEDATA,   /* enter recover and wipe data. */
>>> +     BOOT_WIPEALL,    /* enter recover and wipe all data. */
>>> +     BOOT_CHECKIMG,   /* check firmware img with backup part*/
>>> +     BOOT_FASTBOOT,   /* enter fast boot mode */
>>> +     BOOT_SECUREBOOT_DISABLE,
>>> +     BOOT_CHARGING,   /* enter charge mode */
>>> +     BOOT_MAX         /* MAX VALID BOOT TYPE.*/
>>> +};
>>> +#endif
>> These flags rely on code in the bootloader to actually handle the target
>> action. Nowadays this is uboot, but still a rockchip-specific fork. And we're
>> actively moving away from that, with the recent rk3288 addition to mainline
>> uboot.
>>
>> So unless you convince uboot people that the _underlying special
>> functionality_ behind these flags should be part of uboot, I don't think this
>> is going to fly.
>>
>>
>> In a way this is similar to gpu kernel code talking to proprietary userspace
>> libs - these are also not eligible for the kernel. (meaning stuff like the
>> mali kernel driver not being allowed).
> I don't want to comment on what Linux does or does not want. But I can
> see this sort of feature being useful for devs at least. So long as it
> is defined in a way that is not Rockchip-specific (and the above enum
> looks pretty reasonable on that front, I think it makes sense.
>
> Of course it's a bit odd to target a downstream U-Boot with a Linux
> feature. But hopefully Rockchip's U-Boot support and development will
> move to mainline with time.
    Is there any chance for this patch to be landed?
    As Simon says, it is useful for development. And
    he is upstreaming Rockchip U-boot.
>> [...]
>>
>>> +static int rockchip_reboot_notify(struct notifier_block *this,
>>> +                               unsigned long mode, void *cmd)
>>> +{
>>> +     u32 flag;
>>> +
>>> +     rockchip_get_reboot_flag(cmd, &flag);
>>> +     regmap_write(regmap, flag_reg, flag);
>>> +
>>> +     return NOTIFY_DONE;
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> +static struct notifier_block rockchip_reboot_handler = {
>>> +     .notifier_call = rockchip_reboot_notify,
>>> +     .priority = 150,
>>> +};
>> the restart handlers are meant to really only restart the system, not to
>> execute some actions before the restart happens.
>>
>> See https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/6/3/707 for a similar case.
>>
>>
>> Heiko
> Regards,
> Simon
>
>
>



_______________________________________________
Linux-rockchip mailing list
Linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-rockchip

Re: set rockchip-specific uboot bootmode flags on reboot

[Heiko Stübner]

Hi Andy,


Am Donnerstag, 17. September 2015, 19:07:06 schrieb Andy Yan:
> On 2015年09月10日 02:05, Simon Glass wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > On 8 September 2015 at 16:46, Heiko Stübner <heiko@sntech.de> wrote:
> >> Hi Andy,
> >> 
> >> Am Dienstag, 8. September 2015, 20:43:07 schrieb Andy Yan:
> >>> rockchip platform have a protocol to pass the the kernel
> >>> reboot mode to bootloader by some special registers when
> >>> system reboot.By this way the bootloader can take different
> >>> action according to the different kernel reboot mode, for
> >>> example, command "reboot loader" will reboot the board to
> >>> rockusb mode, this is a very convenient way to get the board
> >>> to download mode.
> >>> 
> >>> Signed-off-by: Andy Yan <andy.yan@rock-chips.com>
> >> 
> >> [...]
> >> 
> >>> @@ -0,0 +1,22 @@
> >>> +#ifndef __MACH_ROCKCHIP_LOADER_H
> >>> +#define __MACH_ROCKCHIP_LOADER_H
> >>> +
> >>> +/*high 24 bits is tag, low 8 bits is type*/
> >>> +#define SYS_LOADER_REBOOT_FLAG   0x5242C300
> >>> +
> >>> +enum {
> >>> +     BOOT_NORMAL = 0, /* normal boot */
> >>> +     BOOT_LOADER,     /* enter loader rockusb mode */
> >>> +     BOOT_MASKROM,    /* enter maskrom rockusb mode (not support now)
> >>> */
> >>> +     BOOT_RECOVER,    /* enter recover */
> >>> +     BOOT_NORECOVER,  /* do not enter recover */
> >>> +     BOOT_SECONDOS,   /* boot second OS (not support now)*/
> >>> +     BOOT_WIPEDATA,   /* enter recover and wipe data. */
> >>> +     BOOT_WIPEALL,    /* enter recover and wipe all data. */
> >>> +     BOOT_CHECKIMG,   /* check firmware img with backup part*/
> >>> +     BOOT_FASTBOOT,   /* enter fast boot mode */
> >>> +     BOOT_SECUREBOOT_DISABLE,
> >>> +     BOOT_CHARGING,   /* enter charge mode */
> >>> +     BOOT_MAX         /* MAX VALID BOOT TYPE.*/
> >>> +};
> >>> +#endif
> >> 
> >> These flags rely on code in the bootloader to actually handle the target
> >> action. Nowadays this is uboot, but still a rockchip-specific fork. And
> >> we're actively moving away from that, with the recent rk3288 addition to
> >> mainline uboot.
> >> 
> >> So unless you convince uboot people that the _underlying special
> >> functionality_ behind these flags should be part of uboot, I don't think
> >> this is going to fly.
> >> 
> >> 
> >> In a way this is similar to gpu kernel code talking to proprietary
> >> userspace libs - these are also not eligible for the kernel. (meaning
> >> stuff like the mali kernel driver not being allowed).
> > 
> > I don't want to comment on what Linux does or does not want. But I can
> > see this sort of feature being useful for devs at least. So long as it
> > is defined in a way that is not Rockchip-specific (and the above enum
> > looks pretty reasonable on that front, I think it makes sense.
> > 
> > Of course it's a bit odd to target a downstream U-Boot with a Linux
> > feature. But hopefully Rockchip's U-Boot support and development will
> > move to mainline with time.
> 
>     Is there any chance for this patch to be landed?
>     As Simon says, it is useful for development. And
>     he is upstreaming Rockchip U-boot.

Sorry that I'm still dragging my feet with this, but I'm still struggling with 
what to do.

I did talk to the arm-soc maintainers and doing this in general seems to be 
fine. Olof was very in favour, others pointed out that just passing through 
the command into the register might be the best solution - without having to 
translate stuff in the kernel.
 

So I guess the translation table (string to number) is the thing to talk 
about. I guess my worries are three-fold:

- will this actually be stable or do we get a future where this translation 
gets to be soc-specific, like "if rk3288 table_a; if rk3368 table_b ..." ?

- can we trim that down to actually supported modes?

- I forgot that we already have other mass-production bootloaders, so what 
does coreboot on veyron devices do with these register-values?


As it is probably also valid for rk3368 and following, I guess it should live 
somehow in drivers/soc/rockchip too.


Heiko

> 
> >> [...]
> >> 
> >>> +static int rockchip_reboot_notify(struct notifier_block *this,
> >>> +                               unsigned long mode, void *cmd)
> >>> +{
> >>> +     u32 flag;
> >>> +
> >>> +     rockchip_get_reboot_flag(cmd, &flag);
> >>> +     regmap_write(regmap, flag_reg, flag);
> >>> +
> >>> +     return NOTIFY_DONE;
> >>> +}
> >>> +
> >>> +static struct notifier_block rockchip_reboot_handler = {
> >>> +     .notifier_call = rockchip_reboot_notify,
> >>> +     .priority = 150,
> >>> +};
> >> 
> >> the restart handlers are meant to really only restart the system, not to
> >> execute some actions before the restart happens.
> >> 
> >> See https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/6/3/707 for a similar case.
> >> 
> >> 
> >> Heiko
> > 
> > Regards,
> > Simon

_______________________________________________
Linux-rockchip mailing list
Linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-rockchip

Re: set rockchip-specific uboot bootmode flags on reboot

[Andy Yan]

Hi Heiko:

On 2015年09月23日 07:16, Heiko Stübner wrote:
> Hi Andy,
>
>
> Am Donnerstag, 17. September 2015, 19:07:06 schrieb Andy Yan:
>> On 2015年09月10日 02:05, Simon Glass wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On 8 September 2015 at 16:46, Heiko Stübner <heiko@sntech.de> wrote:
>>>> Hi Andy,
>>>>
>>>> Am Dienstag, 8. September 2015, 20:43:07 schrieb Andy Yan:
>>>>> rockchip platform have a protocol to pass the the kernel
>>>>> reboot mode to bootloader by some special registers when
>>>>> system reboot.By this way the bootloader can take different
>>>>> action according to the different kernel reboot mode, for
>>>>> example, command "reboot loader" will reboot the board to
>>>>> rockusb mode, this is a very convenient way to get the board
>>>>> to download mode.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Andy Yan <andy.yan@rock-chips.com>
>>>> [...]
>>>>
>>>>> @@ -0,0 +1,22 @@
>>>>> +#ifndef __MACH_ROCKCHIP_LOADER_H
>>>>> +#define __MACH_ROCKCHIP_LOADER_H
>>>>> +
>>>>> +/*high 24 bits is tag, low 8 bits is type*/
>>>>> +#define SYS_LOADER_REBOOT_FLAG   0x5242C300
>>>>> +
>>>>> +enum {
>>>>> +     BOOT_NORMAL = 0, /* normal boot */
>>>>> +     BOOT_LOADER,     /* enter loader rockusb mode */
>>>>> +     BOOT_MASKROM,    /* enter maskrom rockusb mode (not support now)
>>>>> */
>>>>> +     BOOT_RECOVER,    /* enter recover */
>>>>> +     BOOT_NORECOVER,  /* do not enter recover */
>>>>> +     BOOT_SECONDOS,   /* boot second OS (not support now)*/
>>>>> +     BOOT_WIPEDATA,   /* enter recover and wipe data. */
>>>>> +     BOOT_WIPEALL,    /* enter recover and wipe all data. */
>>>>> +     BOOT_CHECKIMG,   /* check firmware img with backup part*/
>>>>> +     BOOT_FASTBOOT,   /* enter fast boot mode */
>>>>> +     BOOT_SECUREBOOT_DISABLE,
>>>>> +     BOOT_CHARGING,   /* enter charge mode */
>>>>> +     BOOT_MAX         /* MAX VALID BOOT TYPE.*/
>>>>> +};
>>>>> +#endif
>>>> These flags rely on code in the bootloader to actually handle the target
>>>> action. Nowadays this is uboot, but still a rockchip-specific fork. And
>>>> we're actively moving away from that, with the recent rk3288 addition to
>>>> mainline uboot.
>>>>
>>>> So unless you convince uboot people that the _underlying special
>>>> functionality_ behind these flags should be part of uboot, I don't think
>>>> this is going to fly.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> In a way this is similar to gpu kernel code talking to proprietary
>>>> userspace libs - these are also not eligible for the kernel. (meaning
>>>> stuff like the mali kernel driver not being allowed).
>>> I don't want to comment on what Linux does or does not want. But I can
>>> see this sort of feature being useful for devs at least. So long as it
>>> is defined in a way that is not Rockchip-specific (and the above enum
>>> looks pretty reasonable on that front, I think it makes sense.
>>>
>>> Of course it's a bit odd to target a downstream U-Boot with a Linux
>>> feature. But hopefully Rockchip's U-Boot support and development will
>>> move to mainline with time.
>>      Is there any chance for this patch to be landed?
>>      As Simon says, it is useful for development. And
>>      he is upstreaming Rockchip U-boot.
> Sorry that I'm still dragging my feet with this, but I'm still struggling with
> what to do.
>
> I did talk to the arm-soc maintainers and doing this in general seems to be
> fine. Olof was very in favour, others pointed out that just passing through
> the command into the register might be the best solution - without having to
> translate stuff in the kernel.
>   
    Some commands are very long(recovery,bootloader, fastboot etc),
    they can't be stored into a register directly. And this also bring 
compatible
    problems to the old boot loader.
>
> So I guess the translation table (string to number) is the thing to talk
> about. I guess my worries are three-fold:
>
> - will this actually be stable or do we get a future where this translation
> gets to be soc-specific, like "if rk3288 table_a; if rk3368 table_b ..." ?
      All Rockchip base socs use this mechanism, but this commands may
      stored in different registers in different soc.
>
> - can we trim that down to actually supported modes?
      I have take a look at exynos and msm  android base platforms, they
      use the same mechanism[1][2], so I think many platforms need this
      function.
      [1] 
https://github.com/droidroidz/Manta_kernel/blob/master/arch/arm/mach-exynos/board-manta-power.c
      [2] 
https://github.com/msm7x30/android_kernel_qcom_msm7x30/blob/android-3.10/arch/arm/mach-msm/restart_7k.c

>
> - I forgot that we already have other mass-production bootloaders, so what
> does coreboot on veyron devices do with these register-values?
>
       coreboot use different download mechanism, it doesn't touch this
       register.
> As it is probably also valid for rk3368 and following, I guess it should live
> somehow in drivers/soc/rockchip too.
     Yes, rk3368 also need this function, so maybe we should put it in
     drivers/soc/rockchip.

     Thanks.
>
>
> Heiko
>
>>>> [...]
>>>>
>>>>> +static int rockchip_reboot_notify(struct notifier_block *this,
>>>>> +                               unsigned long mode, void *cmd)
>>>>> +{
>>>>> +     u32 flag;
>>>>> +
>>>>> +     rockchip_get_reboot_flag(cmd, &flag);
>>>>> +     regmap_write(regmap, flag_reg, flag);
>>>>> +
>>>>> +     return NOTIFY_DONE;
>>>>> +}
>>>>> +
>>>>> +static struct notifier_block rockchip_reboot_handler = {
>>>>> +     .notifier_call = rockchip_reboot_notify,
>>>>> +     .priority = 150,
>>>>> +};
>>>> the restart handlers are meant to really only restart the system, not to
>>>> execute some actions before the restart happens.
>>>>
>>>> See https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/6/3/707 for a similar case.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Heiko
>>> Regards,
>>> Simon
> _______________________________________________
> Linux-rockchip mailing list
> Linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-rockchip