Re: [PATCH] ARM: EXYNOS: Fix incorrect usage of S5P_ARM_CORE1_*registers

From: Tomasz Figa
Date: Wed Jun 19 2013 - 10:28:48 EST

On Wednesday 19 of June 2013 19:25:27 Chander Kashyap wrote:
> On 19 June 2013 19:19, Tomasz Figa <t.figa@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Wednesday 19 of June 2013 14:24:17 Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote:
> >> On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 01:50:57PM +0100, Tomasz Figa wrote:
> >> > On Wednesday 19 of June 2013 17:39:21 Chander Kashyap wrote:
> >> > > On 18 June 2013 23:29, Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> > > > On 06/19/13 02:45, Tomasz Figa wrote:
> >> > > >> Ccing Arnd and Olof, because I forgot to add them to git
> >> > > >> send-email...
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >> Sorry for the noise.
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >> On Tuesday 18 of June 2013 17:26:31 Tomasz Figa wrote:
> >> > > >>> S5P_ARM_CORE1_* registers affect only core 1. To control
> >> > > >>> further
> >> > > >>> cores
> >> > > >>> properly another registers must be used.
> >> > > >>>
> >> > > >>> This patch replaces S5P_ARM_CORE1_* register definitions with
> >> > > >>> S5P_ARM_CORE_*(x) macro which return addresses of registers
> >> > > >>> for
> >> > > >>> specified core.
> >> > > >>>
> >> > > >>> This fixes CPU hotplug on quad core Exynos SoCs on which
> >> > > >>> currently
> >> > > >>> offlining CPUs 2 or 3 caused CPU 1 to be turned off.
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >> Obviously this doesn't happen currently because of the if (cpu
> >> > > >> ==
> >> > > >> 1),
> >> > > >> but>
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Yes, not happened...and just note exynos5440 doesn't support
> >> > > > hotplug :)
> >> > > > so this is available on exynos4412 and added 5420.
> >> > > >
> >> > > >> if logical cpu1 turned out not to be physical cpu1, then it
> >> > > >> would
> >> > > >> crash.
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >> Best regards,
> >> > > >> Tomasz
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >>> In addition,
> >> > > >>> bring-up of CPU 2 and 3 is fixed on boards where bootloader
> >> > > >>> powers
> >> > > >>> off
> >> > > >>> secondary cores by default.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > I need to test on board about above...
> >> > > >
> >> > > >>> Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >> > > >>> Signed-off-by: Tomasz Figa<t.figa@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> >> > > >>> Signed-off-by: Kyungmin Park<kyungmin.park@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> >> > > >>> ---
> >> > > >>>
> >> > > >>> arch/arm/mach-exynos/hotplug.c | 9 +++++----
> >> > > >>> arch/arm/mach-exynos/include/mach/regs-pmu.h | 10 +++++++---
> >> > > >>> arch/arm/mach-exynos/platsmp.c | 9 +++++----
> >> > > >>> 3 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
> >> > > >>>
> >> > > >>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/hotplug.c
> >> > > >>> b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/hotplug.c index af90cfa..c089943 100644
> >> > > >>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/hotplug.c
> >> > > >>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/hotplug.c
> >> > > >>> @@ -93,10 +93,11 @@ static inline void
> >> > > >>> cpu_leave_lowpower(void)
> >> > > >>>
> >> > > >>> static inline void platform_do_lowpower(unsigned int cpu,
> >> > > >>> int
> >> > > >>>
> >> > > >>> *spurious) {
> >> > > >>>
> >> > > >>> for (;;) {
> >> > > >>>
> >> > > >>> + void __iomem *reg_base;
> >> > > >>> + unsigned int phys_cpu = cpu_logical_map(cpu);
> >> > > >>>
> >> > > >>> - /* make cpu1 to be turned off at next WFI
> >> > > >>> command
> >> > > >>> */
> >> > > >>> - if (cpu == 1)
> >> > > >>> - __raw_writel(0,
> >> > > >>> S5P_ARM_CORE1_CONFIGURATION);
> >> > > >>> + reg_base =
> >> > > >>> S5P_ARM_CORE_CONFIGURATION(phys_cpu);
> >> > >
> >> > > Tomasz,
> >> > > This will break for non-zero, MPIDR value. Say if MPIDR is 1 then
> >> > > for
> >> > > cpu0 phys_cpu value will be 0x100,
> >> > > and address calculation will be (S5P_ARM_CORE0_CONFIGURATION +
> >> > > ((0x101) * 0x80)), which is wrong.
> >>
> >> Honestly, I did not understand the reasoning above, please clarify.
> >>
> >> > Hmm, according to the code initializing __cpu_logical_map[] array
> >> > this
> >> > is not true.
> >> >
> >> > Here's the code:
> >> >
> >> > https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git/tre
> >> > e/a
> >> > rch/arm/kernel/setup.c?id=refs/tags/next-20130619#n468
> >> >
> >> > and for used macros and bitmasks:
> >> >
> >> > https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git/tre
> >> > e/a
> >> > rch/arm/include/asm/cputype.h?id=refs/tags/next-20130619#n45
> >> >
> >> > Now the structure of the MPIDR register:
> >> >
> >> > http://infocenter.arm.com/help/index.jsp?topic=/com.arm.doc.ddi0388e
> >> > /CI
> >> > HEBGFG.html
> >> >
> >> > As you can see, the value read from the register in
> >> > smp_setup_processor_id() is only the physical CPU ID, so I don't see
> >> > any
> >> > problem here.
> >>
> >> Define "physical CPU ID" :-)
> >>
> >> There is a problem here: the MPIDR is not an index, and the
> >> cpu_logical_map is populated in arm_dt_init_cpu_maps in:
> >>
> >> https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/a
> >> rch /arm/kernel/devtree.c?id=refs/tags/v3.10-rc6
> >>
> >> with all affinity levels.
> >
> > OK. This is what I was missing. Thanks.
> >
> >> You need to perform a mapping between logical cpus and registers
> >> offset,
> >> you can't use the cpu_logical_map directly for that.
> >
> > Hmm, can't I just extract cluster ID and CPU ID from the MPIDR value
> > and
> > use them appropriately to calculate register offsets?
>
> That will create problem for multi-cluster systems. Say we have two
> clusters then with clusterID 0 and 1. So phys-cpu will be 0x0/0x100,
> 0x1/0x101 ans so on.

I mean, calculate register offset based on two parameters - cluster ID and
CPU ID, like:

...

u32 mpidr = cpu_logical_map(cpu);
u32 phys_cpu = MPIDR_AFFINITY_LEVEL(mpidr, 0);

if (soc_is_exynosXXXX()) {
u32 cluster = MPIDR_AFFINITY_LEVEL(mpidr, 1);

phys_cpu += EXYNOSXXXX_CPUS_PER_CLUSTER * cluster;
}

reg_base = S5P_ARM_CORE_CONFIGURATION(phys_cpu);
__raw_writel(0, reg_base);

...

Best regards,
Tomasz

> > Best regards,
> > Tomasz
> >
> >> Next accident waiting to happen is GIC code (CONFIG_GIC_NON_BANKED),
> >> where cpu_logical_map is used erroneously as an index.
> >>
> >> Lorenzo
>
> --
> with warm regards,
> Chander Kashyap
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe
> linux-samsung-soc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/