From: Vinod Koul <vkoul@kernel.org>
To: Pierre-Louis Bossart <pierre-louis.bossart@linux.intel.com>
Cc: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
tiwai@suse.de, broonie@kernel.org, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org,
jank@cadence.com, srinivas.kandagatla@linaro.org,
slawomir.blauciak@intel.com,
Bard liao <yung-chuan.liao@linux.intel.com>,
Rander Wang <rander.wang@linux.intel.com>,
Ranjani Sridharan <ranjani.sridharan@linux.intel.com>,
Hui Wang <hui.wang@canonical.com>,
Sanyog Kale <sanyog.r.kale@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/7] soundwire: intel: add mutex to prevent concurrent access to SHIM registers
Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2020 19:11:12 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200320134112.GC4885@vkoul-mobl> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200311221026.18174-4-pierre-louis.bossart@linux.intel.com>
On 11-03-20, 17:10, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote:
> Some of the SHIM registers exposed fields that are link specific, and
> in addition some of the power-related registers (SPA/CPA) take time to
> be updated. Uncontrolled access leads to timeouts or errors.
>
> Add a mutex, shared by all links, so that all accesses to such
> registers are serialized, and follow a pattern of read-modify-write.
>
> The mutex initialization is done at the higher layer since the same
> mutex is used for all links.
>
> GitHub issue: https://github.com/thesofproject/linux/issues/1555
> Signed-off-by: Pierre-Louis Bossart <pierre-louis.bossart@linux.intel.com>
> ---
> drivers/soundwire/intel.c | 37 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------
> drivers/soundwire/intel.h | 2 ++
> 2 files changed, 33 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/soundwire/intel.c b/drivers/soundwire/intel.c
> index 1a3b828b03a1..3c271a8044b8 100644
> --- a/drivers/soundwire/intel.c
> +++ b/drivers/soundwire/intel.c
> @@ -286,6 +286,8 @@ static int intel_link_power_up(struct sdw_intel *sdw)
> int spa_mask, cpa_mask;
> int link_control, ret;
>
> + mutex_lock(sdw->link_res->shim_lock);
> +
> /* Link power up sequence */
> link_control = intel_readl(shim, SDW_SHIM_LCTL);
> spa_mask = (SDW_SHIM_LCTL_SPA << link_id);
> @@ -293,6 +295,8 @@ static int intel_link_power_up(struct sdw_intel *sdw)
> link_control |= spa_mask;
>
> ret = intel_set_bit(shim, SDW_SHIM_LCTL, link_control, cpa_mask);
> + mutex_unlock(sdw->link_res->shim_lock);
> +
> if (ret < 0)
> return ret;
>
> @@ -307,6 +311,8 @@ static int intel_shim_init(struct sdw_intel *sdw)
> int sync_reg, ret;
> u16 ioctl = 0, act = 0;
>
> + mutex_lock(sdw->link_res->shim_lock);
> +
> /* Initialize Shim */
> ioctl |= SDW_SHIM_IOCTL_BKE;
> intel_writew(shim, SDW_SHIM_IOCTL(link_id), ioctl);
> @@ -351,6 +357,8 @@ static int intel_shim_init(struct sdw_intel *sdw)
> sync_reg |= SDW_SHIM_SYNC_SYNCCPU;
> ret = intel_clear_bit(shim, SDW_SHIM_SYNC, sync_reg,
> SDW_SHIM_SYNC_SYNCCPU);
> + mutex_unlock(sdw->link_res->shim_lock);
> +
> if (ret < 0)
> dev_err(sdw->cdns.dev, "Failed to set sync period: %d\n", ret);
>
> @@ -363,13 +371,15 @@ static void intel_shim_wake(struct sdw_intel *sdw, bool wake_enable)
> unsigned int link_id = sdw->instance;
> u16 wake_en, wake_sts;
>
> + mutex_lock(sdw->link_res->shim_lock);
> + wake_en = intel_readw(shim, SDW_SHIM_WAKEEN);
> +
> if (wake_enable) {
> /* Enable the wakeup */
> - intel_writew(shim, SDW_SHIM_WAKEEN,
> - (SDW_SHIM_WAKEEN_ENABLE << link_id));
> + wake_en |= (SDW_SHIM_WAKEEN_ENABLE << link_id);
> + intel_writew(shim, SDW_SHIM_WAKEEN, wake_en);
> } else {
> /* Disable the wake up interrupt */
> - wake_en = intel_readw(shim, SDW_SHIM_WAKEEN);
> wake_en &= ~(SDW_SHIM_WAKEEN_ENABLE << link_id);
> intel_writew(shim, SDW_SHIM_WAKEEN, wake_en);
>
> @@ -378,6 +388,7 @@ static void intel_shim_wake(struct sdw_intel *sdw, bool wake_enable)
> wake_sts |= (SDW_SHIM_WAKEEN_ENABLE << link_id);
> intel_writew(shim, SDW_SHIM_WAKESTS_STATUS, wake_sts);
> }
> + mutex_unlock(sdw->link_res->shim_lock);
> }
>
> static int intel_link_power_down(struct sdw_intel *sdw)
> @@ -387,6 +398,8 @@ static int intel_link_power_down(struct sdw_intel *sdw)
> void __iomem *shim = sdw->link_res->shim;
> u16 ioctl;
>
> + mutex_lock(sdw->link_res->shim_lock);
> +
> /* Glue logic */
> ioctl = intel_readw(shim, SDW_SHIM_IOCTL(link_id));
> ioctl |= SDW_SHIM_IOCTL_BKE;
> @@ -403,6 +416,8 @@ static int intel_link_power_down(struct sdw_intel *sdw)
> link_control &= spa_mask;
>
> ret = intel_clear_bit(shim, SDW_SHIM_LCTL, link_control, cpa_mask);
> + mutex_unlock(sdw->link_res->shim_lock);
> +
> if (ret < 0)
> return ret;
>
> @@ -630,11 +645,15 @@ static int intel_pre_bank_switch(struct sdw_bus *bus)
> if (!bus->multi_link)
> return 0;
>
> + mutex_lock(sdw->link_res->shim_lock);
> +
> /* Read SYNC register */
> sync_reg = intel_readl(shim, SDW_SHIM_SYNC);
> sync_reg |= SDW_SHIM_SYNC_CMDSYNC << sdw->instance;
> intel_writel(shim, SDW_SHIM_SYNC, sync_reg);
>
> + mutex_unlock(sdw->link_res->shim_lock);
> +
> return 0;
> }
>
> @@ -649,6 +668,8 @@ static int intel_post_bank_switch(struct sdw_bus *bus)
> if (!bus->multi_link)
> return 0;
>
> + mutex_lock(sdw->link_res->shim_lock);
> +
> /* Read SYNC register */
> sync_reg = intel_readl(shim, SDW_SHIM_SYNC);
>
> @@ -660,9 +681,10 @@ static int intel_post_bank_switch(struct sdw_bus *bus)
> *
> * So, set the SYNCGO bit only if CMDSYNC bit is set for any Master.
> */
> - if (!(sync_reg & SDW_SHIM_SYNC_CMDSYNC_MASK))
> - return 0;
> -
> + if (!(sync_reg & SDW_SHIM_SYNC_CMDSYNC_MASK)) {
> + ret = 0;
> + goto unlock;
> + }
> /*
> * Set SyncGO bit to synchronously trigger a bank switch for
> * all the masters. A write to SYNCGO bit clears CMDSYNC bit for all
> @@ -672,6 +694,9 @@ static int intel_post_bank_switch(struct sdw_bus *bus)
>
> ret = intel_clear_bit(shim, SDW_SHIM_SYNC, sync_reg,
> SDW_SHIM_SYNC_SYNCGO);
> +unlock:
> + mutex_unlock(sdw->link_res->shim_lock);
> +
> if (ret < 0)
> dev_err(sdw->cdns.dev, "Post bank switch failed: %d\n", ret);
>
> diff --git a/drivers/soundwire/intel.h b/drivers/soundwire/intel.h
> index 38b7c125fb10..568c84a80d79 100644
> --- a/drivers/soundwire/intel.h
> +++ b/drivers/soundwire/intel.h
> @@ -15,6 +15,7 @@
> * @irq: Interrupt line
> * @ops: Shim callback ops
> * @dev: device implementing hw_params and free callbacks
> + * @shim_lock: mutex to handle access to shared SHIM registers
> */
> struct sdw_intel_link_res {
> struct platform_device *pdev;
> @@ -25,6 +26,7 @@ struct sdw_intel_link_res {
> int irq;
> const struct sdw_intel_ops *ops;
> struct device *dev;
> + struct mutex *shim_lock; /* protect shared registers */
Where is this mutex initialized? Did you test this...
--
~Vinod
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-03-20 13:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-03-11 22:10 [PATCH 0/7] SoundWire: intel: fix SHIM programming sequences Pierre-Louis Bossart
2020-03-11 22:10 ` [PATCH 1/7] soundwire: intel: add helpers for link power down and shim wake Pierre-Louis Bossart
2020-03-11 22:10 ` [PATCH 2/7] soundwire: intel: reuse code for wait loops to set/clear bits Pierre-Louis Bossart
2020-03-20 13:38 ` Vinod Koul
2020-03-11 22:10 ` [PATCH 3/7] soundwire: intel: add mutex to prevent concurrent access to SHIM registers Pierre-Louis Bossart
2020-03-20 13:41 ` Vinod Koul [this message]
2020-03-20 14:07 ` Pierre-Louis Bossart
2020-03-23 12:18 ` Vinod Koul
2020-03-11 22:10 ` [PATCH 4/7] soundwire: intel: add definitions for shim_mask Pierre-Louis Bossart
2020-03-20 13:42 ` Vinod Koul
2020-03-20 14:13 ` Pierre-Louis Bossart
2020-03-23 12:28 ` Vinod Koul
2020-03-11 22:10 ` [PATCH 5/7] soundwire: intel: follow documentation sequences for SHIM registers Pierre-Louis Bossart
2020-03-20 13:51 ` Vinod Koul
2020-03-20 14:20 ` Pierre-Louis Bossart
2020-03-23 12:31 ` Vinod Koul
2020-03-11 22:10 ` [PATCH 6/7] soundwire: intel: introduce a helper to arm link synchronization Pierre-Louis Bossart
2020-03-11 22:10 ` [PATCH 7/7] soundwire: intel: introduce helper for " Pierre-Louis Bossart
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=20200320134112.GC4885@vkoul-mobl \
--to=vkoul@kernel.org \
--cc=alsa-devel@alsa-project.org \
--cc=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=hui.wang@canonical.com \
--cc=jank@cadence.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pierre-louis.bossart@linux.intel.com \
--cc=rander.wang@linux.intel.com \
--cc=ranjani.sridharan@linux.intel.com \
--cc=sanyog.r.kale@intel.com \
--cc=slawomir.blauciak@intel.com \
--cc=srinivas.kandagatla@linaro.org \
--cc=tiwai@suse.de \
--cc=yung-chuan.liao@linux.intel.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