Re: [PATCH v2 00/12] arm64: dts: qcom: sc8280xp: PCIe fixes and GICv3 ITS enable

Manivannan Sadhasivam
2024-02-29T13:54:15Z

On Thu, Feb 29, 2024 at 02:10:21PM +0100, Johan Hovold wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 29, 2024 at 05:54:16PM +0530, Manivannan Sadhasivam wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 29, 2024 at 11:25:48AM +0100, Johan Hovold wrote:
>
> > > As I mentioned, the 'required-opps' binding update is needed to fix the
> > > missing OPP vote so blocking the binding patch would block merging the
> > > DT fix which could otherwise go into 6.8.
>
> > I agree that the fix gets the priority. But some maintainers perfer to merge fix
> > patches _only_ if they are fixing the issue introduced in the ongoing release.
> > But if Bjorn has no issues in merging these for 6.8, then it is fine.
>
> It also depends on the severity of the issue and to some extent the
> complexity of the fix. These binding fixes are certainly low risk. :)
>

Right.

> > > The 'msi-map-mask' is arguably a fix of the binding which should never
> > > have had that property, but sure, it's strictly only needed for 6.9.
> > >
> > > And Bjorn A has already checked with the Qualcomm PCI team regarding
> > > ASPM. It's also been two weeks since you said you were going to check
> > > with your contacts. Is it really worth waiting more for an answer from
> > > that part of the team? We can always amend the ASPM fixes later when/if
> > > we learn more.
> > >
> > > Note that this is also a blocker for merging ITS support for 6.9.
>
> > I got it, but we cannot just merge the patches without finding the rootcause. I
> > heard from Qcom that this AER error could also be due to PHY init sequence as
> > spotted on some other platforms, so if that is the case then the DT property is
> > not correct.
>
> I've verified the PHY sequences both against what the UEFI firmware (and
> hence Windows) uses as well as against the internal Qualcomm
> documentation (with the help of Bjorn A). And Qualcomm did say that such
> errors are also seen under Windows on these platforms.
>

Well, sometimes the init sequence published by qualcomm could turn out to be
faulty. That's why they publish v2 sequence and such. And I want to rule out
that possibility in this case.

> But the fact that the symptoms differ between the CRD and X13s, which
> use the same Atheros Wi-Fi controller (and the same PHY initialisation)
> also suggests that this may to some extent be due to some property of
> the machine.
>
> Notably, on the X13s there are lot of errors when pushing data
> (e.g. using iperf3), whereas on the CRD the are no errors when running
> such tests.
>
> When leaving the CRD on for long periods of time with the Wi-Fi
> disconnected, I do however see occasional correctable errors.
>

This may be due to hardware design that I agree (possibly influenced by driver
defect).

> > Since this is not the hot target now (for Qcom), it takes time to
> > check things.
>
> I think that based on the available data it's reasonable to go ahead and
> merge these patches. In the event that this turns out to be a
> configuration issue, we can just drop the 'aspm-no-l0s' properties
> again.
>

Well the problem is, if you are not sure, then adding the DT properties is
certainly not correct. As that implies a hardware defect, but it may not be.
So let's wait for some time to find out the actual issue.

- Mani

--
மணிவண்ணன் சதாசிவம்