Re: [PATCH 05/18] power: reset: Add AT91 reset driver

[Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD]

On Jul 3, 2014, at 10:59 PM, Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Thu, Jul 03, 2014 at 10:39:08PM +0800, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:
>>> +++ b/drivers/power/reset/at91-reset.c
>>> @@ -0,0 +1,202 @@
>>> +/*
>>> + * Atmel AT91 SAM9 SoCs reset code
>>> + *
>>> + * Copyright (C) 2014 Maxime Ripard
>>> + *
>>> + * Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> 
>> you can not own the copyright as it’s basically a copy of other
>> people code
> 
> The previous names are missing, right.
> 
>>> + *
>>> + * This file is licensed under the terms of the GNU General Public
>>> + * License version 2.  This program is licensed "as is" without any
>>> + * warranty of any kind, whether express or implied.
>>> + */
>>> +
>>> +#include <linux/io.h>
>>> +#include <linux/module.h>
>>> +#include <linux/of_address.h>
>>> +#include <linux/platform_device.h>
>>> +#include <linux/reboot.h>
>>> +
>>> +#include <asm/system_misc.h>
>>> +
>>> +#include <mach/at91sam9_ddrsdr.h>
>>> +#include <mach/at91sam9_sdramc.h>
>>> +
>>> +#define AT91_RSTC_CR	0x00		/* Reset Controller Control Register */
>>> +#define	AT91_RSTC_PROCRST	BIT(0)		/* Processor Reset */
>>> +#define	AT91_RSTC_PERRST	BIT(2)		/* Peripheral Reset */
>>> +#define	AT91_RSTC_EXTRST	BIT(3)		/* External Reset */
>>> +#define	AT91_RSTC_KEY		(0xa5 << 24)	/* KEY Password */
>>> +
>>> +#define AT91_RSTC_SR	0x04		/* Reset Controller Status Register */
>>> +#define	AT91_RSTC_URSTS		BIT(0)		/* User Reset Status */
>>> +#define	AT91_RSTC_RSTTYP	GENMASK(10, 8)	/* Reset Type */
>>> +#define	AT91_RSTC_NRSTL		BIT(16)		/* NRST Pin Level */
>>> +#define	AT91_RSTC_SRCMP		BIT(17)		/* Software Reset Command in Progress */
>>> +
>>> +#define AT91_RSTC_MR	0x08		/* Reset Controller Mode Register */
>>> +#define	AT91_RSTC_URSTEN	BIT(0)		/* User Reset Enable */
>>> +#define	AT91_RSTC_URSTIEN	BIT(4)		/* User Reset Interrupt Enable */
>>> +#define	AT91_RSTC_ERSTL		GENMASK(11, 8)	/* External Reset Length */
>>> +
>>> +enum reset_type {
>>> +	RESET_TYPE_GENERAL	= 0,
>>> +	RESET_TYPE_WAKEUP	= 1,
>>> +	RESET_TYPE_WATCHDOG	= 2,
>>> +	RESET_TYPE_SOFTWARE	= 3,
>>> +	RESET_TYPE_USER		= 4,
>>> +};
>>> +
>>> +static void __iomem *at91_ramc_base[2], *at91_rstc_base;
>>> +
>>> +static void at91sam9_restart(enum reboot_mode mode, const char *cmd)
>>> +{
>>> +	asm volatile(
>>> +		".balign 32\n\t"
>>> +
>>> +		"str	%2, [%0, #" __stringify(AT91_SDRAMC_TR) "]\n\t"
>>> +		"str	%3, [%0, #" __stringify(AT91_SDRAMC_LPR) "]\n\t"
>>> +		"str	%4, [%1, #" __stringify(AT91_RSTC_CR) "]\n\t"
>>> +
>>> +		"b	.\n\t"
>>> +		:
>>> +		: "r" (at91_ramc_base[0]),
>>> +		  "r" (at91_rstc_base),
>>> +		  "r" (1),
>>> +		  "r" (AT91_SDRAMC_LPCB_POWER_DOWN),
>>> +		  "r" (AT91_RSTC_KEY | AT91_RSTC_PERRST | AT91_RSTC_PROCRST));
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> +static void at91sam9g45_restart(enum reboot_mode mode, const char *cmd)
>>> +{
>>> +	asm volatile(
>>> +		"cmp	%1, #0\n\t"
>>> +		"beq	1f\n\t"
>>> +
>>> +		"ldr	r0, [%1]\n\t"
>>> +		"cmp	r0, #0\n\t"
>>> +
>>> +		".balign 32\n\t"
>>> +
>>> +		"1:	str	%3, [%0, #" __stringify(AT91_DDRSDRC_RTR) "]\n\t"
>>> +		"	str	%4, [%0, #" __stringify(AT91_DDRSDRC_RTR) "]\n\t"
>>> +		"	strne	%3, [%1, #" __stringify(AT91_DDRSDRC_RTR) "]\n\t"
>>> +		"	strne	%4, [%1, #" __stringify(AT91_DDRSDRC_RTR) "]\n\t"
>>> +		"	str	%5, [%2, #" __stringify(AT91_RSTC_CR) "]\n\t"
>>> +
>>> +		"	b	.\n\t"
>>> +		:
>>> +		: "r" (at91_ramc_base[0]),
>>> +		  "r" (at91_ramc_base[1]),
>>> +		  "r" (at91_rstc_base),
>>> +		  "r" (1),
>>> +		  "r" (AT91_DDRSDRC_LPCB_POWER_DOWN),
>>> +		  "r" (AT91_RSTC_KEY | AT91_RSTC_PERRST | AT91_RSTC_PROCRST)
>>> +		: "r0");
>>> +}
>>> +
>> move this to an assembly file more easy to read than a C code
> 
> Nope. It's a pain to pass variable to an external assembly file, and
> this makes the use of global variable pretty much mandatory, which is
> definitely not great.

Not at all I did for the PM slow clock code just write a function and pas it as a parameter
you have 3

so basically you have to use the current and just pass at91_ramc_base[0], at91_ramc_base[1]
and at91_rstc_base
it’s 3 lignes of modification, if you have at91_ramc_base and at91_ramc_base same

so NACK
> 
>> 
>>> +static void __init at91_reset_status(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>> +{
>>> +	u32 reg = readl(at91_rstc_base + AT91_RSTC_SR);
>>> +	char *reason;
>>> +
>>> +	switch ((reg & AT91_RSTC_RSTTYP) >> 8) {
>>> +	case RESET_TYPE_GENERAL:
>>> +		reason = "general reset";
>>> +		break;
>>> +	case RESET_TYPE_WAKEUP:
>>> +		reason = "wakeup";
>>> +		break;
>>> +	case RESET_TYPE_WATCHDOG:
>>> +		reason = "watchdog reset";
>>> +		break;
>>> +	case RESET_TYPE_SOFTWARE:
>>> +		reason = "software reset";
>>> +		break;
>>> +	case RESET_TYPE_USER:
>>> +		reason = "user reset";
>>> +		break;
>>> +	default:
>>> +		reason = "unknown reset";
>>> +		break;
>>> +	}
>>> +
>>> +	pr_info("AT91: Starting after %s\n", reason);
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> +static struct of_device_id at91_ramc_of_match[] = {
>>> +	{ .compatible = "atmel,at91sam9260-sdramc", },
>>> +	{ .compatible = "atmel,at91sam9g45-ddramc", },
>>> +	{ /* sentinel */ }
>>> +};
>>> +
>>> +static struct of_device_id at91_reset_of_match[] = {
>>> +	{ .compatible = "atmel,at91sam9260-rstc", .data = at91sam9_restart },
>>> +	{ .compatible = "atmel,at91sam9g45-rstc", .data = at91sam9g45_restart },
>>> +	{ /* sentinel */ }
>>> +};
>>> +
>>> +static int at91_reset_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>> +{
>>> +	struct resource *res;
>>> +
>>> +	res = platform_get_resource(pdev, IORESOURCE_MEM, 0);
>>> +	at91_rstc_base = devm_ioremap_resource(&pdev->dev, res);
>>> +	if (IS_ERR(at91_rstc_base)) {
>>> +		dev_err(&pdev->dev, "Could not map reset controller address\n");
>>> +		return PTR_ERR(at91_rstc_base);
>>> +	}
>>> +
>>> +	if (pdev->dev.of_node) {
>> 
>> split in 2 function more easy to ready and less indentation
> 
> ok.
> 
>>> +		const struct of_device_id *match;
>>> +		struct device_node *np;
>>> +		int idx = 0;
>>> +
>>> +		for_each_matching_node(np, at91_ramc_of_match) {
>>> +			at91_ramc_base[idx] = of_iomap(np, 0);
>>> +			if (!at91_ramc_base[idx]) {
>>> +				dev_err(&pdev->dev, "Could not map ram controller address\n");
>>> +				return -ENODEV;
>>> +			}
>>> +			idx++;
>>> +		}
>> 
>> and if you can not probe the ram controler it’s a panic not a -ENODEV
>> 
>> as you have an unstable platform
> 
> I don't really see why. That the pm code and the reset code won't be
> able to work, it's obvious. But making the assumption that the
> platforms don't have a RAM properly setup just because it doesn't have
> a DT node seems quite weak.

no as if you do not have the RAMC your reset will cause hardware issue as there is a bug
in the SoC so yes mandatory as 95% of the people will not known why there board will suddenly
do not reboot. As this specific reset in assembly was write to run from cache to fix a SoC bug
in the reset controller
> 
>>> +
>>> +		match = of_match_node(at91_reset_of_match, pdev->dev.of_node);
>>> +		arm_pm_restart = match->data;
>>> +	} else {
>>> +		const struct platform_device_id *match;
>>> +		int idx = 0;
>>> +
>>> +		for (idx = 0; idx < 2; idx++) {
>>> +			res = platform_get_resource(pdev, IORESOURCE_MEM, idx + 1 );
>>> +			at91_ramc_base[idx] = devm_ioremap_resource(&pdev->dev, res);
>>> +			if (IS_ERR(at91_ramc_base[idx])) {
>>> +				dev_err(&pdev->dev, "Could not map ram controller address\n");
>>> +				return PTR_ERR(at91_rstc_base);
>>> +			}
>>> +		}
>>> +
>>> +		match = platform_get_device_id(pdev);
>>> +		arm_pm_restart = (void (*)(enum reboot_mode, const char*))
>>> +			match->driver_data;
>>> +	}
>>> +
>>> +	at91_reset_status(pdev);
>>> +
>>> +	return 0;
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> +static struct platform_device_id at91_reset_plat_match[] = {
>>> +	{ "at91-sam9-reset", (unsigned long)at91sam9_restart },
>>> +	{ "at91-g45-reset", (unsigned long)at91sam9g45_restart },
>> 	    at91-sam9???
>> 
>> 	    from the beginning of DT we put the first SoC were the
>> 	    reset was introduce and why do you change the DT binding?
> 
> Except that this is not about DT probing, but the old-style board
> files one.
> 

except that in al the other driver such as FBDEV we use the same principle for platform_device

Best Regards,
J.

> Maxime
> 
> -- 
> Maxime Ripard, Free Electrons
> Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering
> http://free-electrons.com
> _______________________________________________
> linux-arm-kernel mailing list
> linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail