Re: [PATCH v16 3/6] soc: qcom: rpmh: Invalidate SLEEP and WAKE TCSes before flushing new data

From: Maulik Shah
Date: Sun Apr 12 2020 - 09:26:06 EST


Hi,

On 4/10/2020 1:53 AM, Stephen Boyd wrote:
Quoting Maulik Shah (2020-04-05 23:32:18)
TCSes have previously programmed data when rpmh_flush is called.
rpmh_flush()
Ok, i will update in v17.

This can cause old data to trigger along with newly flushed.

Fix this by cleaning SLEEP and WAKE TCSes before new data is flushed.

With this there is no need to invoke rpmh_rsc_invalidate() call from
rpmh_invalidate().

Simplify rpmh_invalidate() by moving invalidate_batch() inside.

Fixes: 600513dfeef3 ("drivers: qcom: rpmh: cache sleep/wake state requests")
Signed-off-by: Maulik Shah <mkshah@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reviewed-by: Douglas Anderson <dianders@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/soc/qcom/rpmh.c | 41 ++++++++++++++++++-----------------------
1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/soc/qcom/rpmh.c b/drivers/soc/qcom/rpmh.c
index 03630ae..a75f3df 100644
--- a/drivers/soc/qcom/rpmh.c
+++ b/drivers/soc/qcom/rpmh.c
@@ -498,24 +492,25 @@ int rpmh_flush(struct rpmh_ctrlr *ctrlr)
}
/**
- * rpmh_invalidate: Invalidate all sleep and active sets
- * sets.
+ * rpmh_invalidate: Invalidate sleep and wake sets in batch_cache
*
* @dev: The device making the request
*
- * Invalidate the sleep and active values in the TCS blocks.
+ * Invalidate the sleep and wake values in batch_cache.
*/
int rpmh_invalidate(const struct device *dev)
{
struct rpmh_ctrlr *ctrlr = get_rpmh_ctrlr(dev);
- int ret;
-
- invalidate_batch(ctrlr);
+ struct batch_cache_req *req, *tmp;
+ unsigned long flags;
- do {
- ret = rpmh_rsc_invalidate(ctrlr_to_drv(ctrlr));
- } while (ret == -EAGAIN);
+ spin_lock_irqsave(&ctrlr->cache_lock, flags);
+ list_for_each_entry_safe(req, tmp, &ctrlr->batch_cache, list)
+ kfree(req);
+ INIT_LIST_HEAD(&ctrlr->batch_cache);
+ ctrlr->dirty = true;
+ spin_unlock_irqrestore(&ctrlr->cache_lock, flags);
- return ret;
+ return 0;
Now this always returns 0. Maybe it should become a void function, but
doing that requires a change in the interconnect code so maybe do it
later.

Sure i will add in my To-Do list.

Thanks,
Maulik

--
QUALCOMM INDIA, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation