From: rnayak@ti•com (Rajendra Nayak)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists•infradead.org
Subject: Boot hang regression 3.10.0-rc4 -> 3.10.0
Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2013 12:14:15 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <51E39A3F.6080106@ti.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <51DF508F.3050703@ti.com>
On Friday 12 July 2013 06:10 AM, Suman Anna wrote:
> On 07/11/2013 04:59 AM, Grygorii Strashko wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On 07/11/2013 09:32 AM, Tony Lindgren wrote:
>>> * Felipe Balbi <balbi@ti•com> [130710 09:18]:
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 07:07:04PM +0300, Felipe Balbi wrote:
>>>>> how about something like below ? It makes omap_device/hwmod and
>>>>> pm_runtime agree on the initial state of the device and will prevent
>>>>> ->runtime_resume() from being called on first pm_runtime_get*() done
>>>>> during probe.
>>>>>
>>>>> This is similar to what PCI bus does (if you look at pci_pm_init()).
>>>>>
>>>>> commit 59108a500b4ab4b1a5102648a3360276dbf7df6f
>>>>> Author: Felipe Balbi <balbi@ti•com>
>>>>> Date: Wed Jul 10 18:50:16 2013 +0300
>>>>>
>>>>> arm: omap2plus: unidle devices which are about to probe
>>>>>
>>>>> in order to make HWMOD and pm_runtime agree on the
>>>>> initial state of the device, we will unidle the device
>>>>> and call pm_runtime_set_active() to tell pm_runtime
>>>>> that the device is really active.
>> Don't think that it's good idea (
>> I've checked some driver's and think this patch will enable some devices
>> unpredictably:
>> - hwspinlock
>> - mailbox
>> - iommu
>> - ipu
>> All above devices need to be enabled on demand only (no
>> pm_runtime_get*() calls in probe). More over, some of them have very
>> specific enabling sequence - like ipu).
>>
>> May be Summan can say more on that.
>
> Indeed, this is a problem for any of the slave processor devices.
> mailbox and iommu would be slaves to the remoteproc and the drivers have
> a specific sequence of bringing up a processor. The current
> hwmod/omap_device code is such that these devices will be left in reset
> and the driver code use the omap_device_(de)assert_hardreset API
> together with omap_device_enable code to bring up the devices. The
> remoteproc driver also needs to assert the resets (there are other
> problems associated with using omap_device_idle for remoteproc and
> iommu) for bringing up the devices after a suspend sequence. hwspinlock
> and mailbox may get away since they are in CORE domain, but definitely
> an issue for iommu and remoteproc. I would think that this would also
> affect other compute devices like IVAHD, ISS, SGX.
Today, for these IPs I guess hwmod waits for the resets to be de-asserted, right?
/*
* If an IP block contains HW reset lines and all of them are
* asserted, we let integration code associated with that
* block handle the enable. We've received very little
* information on what those driver authors need, and until
* detailed information is provided and the driver code is
* posted to the public lists, this is probably the best we
* can do.
*/
if (_are_all_hardreset_lines_asserted(oh))
return 0;
What if this information is send back to omap_device() through a return value
so omap_device() knows about this too, so it avoids marking the omap device as
enabled? Wouldn't that fix the issue?
>
> regards
> Suman
>
>>
>>>>>
>>>>> By the time driver's probe() is reached, a call to
>>>>> pm_runtime_get_sync() will not cause driver's
>>>>> ->runtime_resume() method to be called at first, only
>>>>> after a successful ->runtime_suspend().
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Felipe Balbi <balbi@ti•com>
>>>>
>>>> btw, this is RFC, haven't tested at all.
>>>
>>> Yes it does not compile, then removing the extra ; at the end
>>> of the functions, it oopses with a NULL pointer exception.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Tony
>>> --
>>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in
>>> the body of a message to majordomo at vger.kernel.org
>>> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>>>
>>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-07-15 6:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 48+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-07-04 13:25 Boot hang regression 3.10.0-rc4 -> 3.10.0 Mark Jackson
2013-07-04 15:14 ` Mark Jackson
2013-07-04 16:00 ` Mark Jackson
2013-07-05 8:11 ` Bedia, Vaibhav
2013-07-05 11:59 ` Tony Lindgren
2013-07-05 13:20 ` Bedia, Vaibhav
2013-07-05 13:31 ` Bedia, Vaibhav
2013-07-08 11:25 ` Tony Lindgren
2013-07-08 12:16 ` Tony Lindgren
2013-07-08 12:41 ` Rajendra Nayak
2013-07-08 13:10 ` Tony Lindgren
2013-07-08 13:20 ` Rajendra Nayak
2013-07-08 13:25 ` Rajendra Nayak
2013-07-08 13:35 ` Felipe Balbi
2013-07-09 5:33 ` Rajendra Nayak
2013-07-09 6:42 ` Felipe Balbi
2013-07-09 7:19 ` Rajendra Nayak
2013-07-09 7:40 ` Felipe Balbi
2013-07-09 18:59 ` Grygorii Strashko
2013-07-09 19:41 ` Felipe Balbi
2013-07-10 12:16 ` Grygorii Strashko
2013-07-10 12:25 ` Felipe Balbi
2013-07-10 8:22 ` Kevin Hilman
2013-07-10 12:10 ` Tony Lindgren
2013-07-10 12:27 ` Tony Lindgren
2013-07-10 14:26 ` Tony Lindgren
2013-07-10 16:07 ` Felipe Balbi
2013-07-10 16:11 ` Felipe Balbi
2013-07-11 6:32 ` Tony Lindgren
2013-07-11 9:59 ` Grygorii Strashko
2013-07-12 0:40 ` Suman Anna
2013-07-15 6:44 ` Rajendra Nayak [this message]
2013-07-15 10:01 ` Rajendra Nayak
2013-07-15 19:23 ` Suman Anna
2013-07-16 6:30 ` Rajendra Nayak
2013-07-11 9:17 ` Rajendra Nayak
2013-07-11 9:26 ` Felipe Balbi
2013-07-11 10:16 ` [PATCH] arm: omap2plus: unidle devices which are about to probe Felipe Balbi
2013-07-12 11:58 ` Grygorii Strashko
2013-07-12 12:10 ` Felipe Balbi
2013-07-12 12:27 ` Rajendra Nayak
2013-07-13 22:21 ` Kevin Hilman
2013-07-11 9:59 ` Boot hang regression 3.10.0-rc4 -> 3.10.0 Grygorii Strashko
2013-07-16 10:27 ` Grygorii Strashko
2013-07-17 7:10 ` Rajendra Nayak
2013-07-11 6:18 ` Rajendra Nayak
2013-07-11 6:24 ` Tony Lindgren
2013-07-11 9:11 ` Rajendra Nayak
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=51E39A3F.6080106@ti.com \
--to=rnayak@ti$(echo .)com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists$(echo .)infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
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