From: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
To: sathyanarayanan kuppuswamy <sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Rajneesh Bhardwaj <rajneesh.bhardwaj@intel.com>,
andy@infradead.org, qipeng.zha@intel.com, dvhart@infradead.org,
david.e.box@linux.intel.com, platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-watchdog@vger.kernel.org,
wim@iguana.be
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/4] watchdog: iTCO_wdt: Fix PMC GCR memory mapping failure
Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2017 10:50:52 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170317175052.GA23030@roeck-us.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <b0d660b8-219a-ebd7-e7c4-cdd261e5a081@linux.intel.com>
On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 10:24:35AM -0700, sathyanarayanan kuppuswamy wrote:
>
>
> On 03/17/2017 06:40 AM, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> >On 03/17/2017 04:43 AM, Rajneesh Bhardwaj wrote:
> >>On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 05:41:35PM -0700, Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan
> >>wrote:
> >>>Currently, iTCO watchdog driver uses memory map to access
> >>>PMC_CFG GCR register. But the entire GCR address space is
> >>>already mapped in intel_scu_ipc driver. So remapping the
> >>
> >>intel_pmc_ipc driver.
> >>
> >>>GCR register in this driver causes the mem request failure in
> >>>iTCO_wdt probe function. This patch fixes this issue by
> >>>using PMC GCR read/write API's to access PMC_CFG register.
> >>>
> >>>Signed-off-by: Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan
> >>><sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com>
> >>>---
> >>> drivers/watchdog/iTCO_wdt.c | 31 +++++++------------------------
> >>> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 24 deletions(-)
> >>>
> >>>diff --git a/drivers/watchdog/iTCO_wdt.c b/drivers/watchdog/iTCO_wdt.c
> >>>index 3d0abc0..31abfc5 100644
> >>>--- a/drivers/watchdog/iTCO_wdt.c
> >>>+++ b/drivers/watchdog/iTCO_wdt.c
> >>>@@ -68,6 +68,8 @@
> >>> #include <linux/io.h> /* For inb/outb/... */
> >>> #include <linux/platform_data/itco_wdt.h>
> >>>
> >>>+#include <asm/intel_pmc_ipc.h>
> >>>+
> >>> #include "iTCO_vendor.h"
> >>>
> >>> /* Address definitions for the TCO */
> >>>@@ -94,12 +96,6 @@ struct iTCO_wdt_private {
> >>> unsigned int iTCO_version;
> >>> struct resource *tco_res;
> >>> struct resource *smi_res;
> >>>- /*
> >>>- * NO_REBOOT flag is Memory-Mapped GCS register bit 5 (TCO
> >>>version 2),
> >>>- * or memory-mapped PMC register bit 4 (TCO version 3).
> >>>- */
> >>
> >>Better to retain this comment elsewhere.
> >>
> >>>- struct resource *gcs_pmc_res;
> >>>- unsigned long __iomem *gcs_pmc;
> >>> /* the lock for io operations */
> >>> spinlock_t io_lock;
> >>> /* the PCI-device */
> >>>@@ -176,9 +172,9 @@ static void iTCO_wdt_set_NO_REBOOT_bit(struct
> >>>iTCO_wdt_private *p)
> >>>
> >>> /* Set the NO_REBOOT bit: this disables reboots */
> >>> if (p->iTCO_version >= 2) {
> >>>- val32 = readl(p->gcs_pmc);
> >>>+ val32 = intel_pmc_gcr_read(PMC_GCR_PMC_CFG_REG);
> >>
> >>better to have protection and error handling, discussed in v2, 2/4.
> >>
> >>compiled and tested this on APL and i see iTCO_WDT driver loads fine.
> >>Since
> >>it impacts core WDT functionality, need to be thoroughly tested on
> >>various
> >>platforms.
> >>
> >
> >I don't think I (or the watchdog mailing list) was copied on the original
> >patch.
> Sorry. Its my mistake. I will fix it in next series update.
> >Major immediate concern is that this introduces a dependency on external
> >code.
> >The pmc_ipc driver's Kconfig entry states "This is not needed for PC-type
> >machines". I don't know where the function is introduced, but I hope this
> >change
> >does not require the pmc_ipc code to be present on such machines for the
> >watchdog
> >to work. It would be bad if it does. If it doesn't, it appears that the
> >function
> >should not be declared in asm/intel_pmc_ipc.h.
> It should not create any compile time dependency with INTEL_PMC_IPC config
> option. If INTEL_PMC_IPC_CONFIG is disabled, we use
> empty definitions for these calls defined in asm/intel_pmc_ipc.h
>
So the watchdog driver would get an error if CONFIG_INTEL_PMC_IPC
is not defined ? And that is supposed to be acceptable ?
> But iTCO_wdt driver already has runtime dependency with INTEL_PMIC_IPC if
> its version iTCO_version >= 2.
>
Unless I am missing something, there is no explicit dependency. AFAICS
the watchdog driver works just fine if INTEL_PMIC_IPC is not enabled,
and/or if it is built as module and the module is not loaded.
Maybe you mean that the watchdog driver doesn't load if the INTEL_PMIC_IPC
driver is loaded. That would be a bug, not a dependency.
Guenter
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-03-17 17:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-03-16 3:32 [PATCH v1 1/1] platform/x86: intel_pmc_ipc: fix io mem mapping size Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan
2017-03-16 14:52 ` Rajneesh Bhardwaj
2017-03-16 16:05 ` Andy Shevchenko
2017-03-16 18:13 ` Rajneesh Bhardwaj
2017-03-16 20:12 ` Andy Shevchenko
2017-03-16 21:15 ` sathyanarayanan kuppuswamy
2017-03-16 18:50 ` sathyanarayanan kuppuswamy
2017-03-16 19:20 ` Rajneesh Bhardwaj
2017-03-16 21:05 ` sathyanarayanan kuppuswamy
2017-03-17 0:41 ` [PATCH v2 1/4] platform/x86: intel_pmc_ipc: fix gcr offset Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan
2017-03-17 0:41 ` [PATCH v2 2/4] platform/x86: intel_pmc_ipc: Add pmc gcr read/write api's Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan
2017-03-17 11:26 ` Rajneesh Bhardwaj
2017-03-17 17:11 ` sathyanarayanan kuppuswamy
2017-03-17 0:41 ` [PATCH v2 3/4] watchdog: iTCO_wdt: Fix PMC GCR memory mapping failure Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan
2017-03-17 11:43 ` Rajneesh Bhardwaj
2017-03-17 13:40 ` Guenter Roeck
2017-03-17 14:05 ` Rajneesh Bhardwaj
2017-03-17 14:25 ` Andy Shevchenko
2017-03-17 17:37 ` sathyanarayanan kuppuswamy
2017-03-17 18:38 ` Andy Shevchenko
2017-03-17 18:50 ` sathyanarayanan kuppuswamy
2017-03-17 17:24 ` sathyanarayanan kuppuswamy
2017-03-17 17:50 ` Guenter Roeck [this message]
2017-03-17 18:39 ` sathyanarayanan kuppuswamy
2017-03-17 17:15 ` sathyanarayanan kuppuswamy
2017-03-20 2:52 ` kbuild test robot
2017-03-17 0:41 ` [PATCH v2 4/4] platform/x86: intel_pmc_ipc: remove iTCO GCR mem resource Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan
2017-03-17 11:47 ` Rajneesh Bhardwaj
2017-03-17 11:13 ` [PATCH v2 1/4] platform/x86: intel_pmc_ipc: fix gcr offset Rajneesh Bhardwaj
2017-03-17 17:06 ` sathyanarayanan kuppuswamy
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=20170317175052.GA23030@roeck-us.net \
--to=linux@roeck-us.net \
--cc=andy@infradead.org \
--cc=david.e.box@linux.intel.com \
--cc=dvhart@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-watchdog@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=qipeng.zha@intel.com \
--cc=rajneesh.bhardwaj@intel.com \
--cc=sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com \
--cc=wim@iguana.be \
/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