Re: [PATCH V2 11/12] spmi: pmic-arb: add support for HW version 5

[kgunda]

On 2017-08-18 16:43, kgunda@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> On 2017-08-17 17:58, Shawn Guo wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 17, 2017 at 03:38:30PM +0530, kgunda@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > > The intention of this check is to avoid the access to the
> > > peripherals those are
> > > not owned by the current EE (APSS) and it is expected to return a
> > > failure if the
> > > peripheral that is not owned by the current EE is trying to be 
> > > accessed.
> >
> > Thanks for the background of this check.
> >
> > > Looks like you trying to access the GPIOs 0xc000 and 0xc100,
> > > which are owned by modem subsystem but not the APSS. That is why you
> > > seeing the failure for that.
> > > Please change the ownership of those GPIOs to APSS (id '0') if you
> > > are working on a non-modem device (APQ).
> >
> > Yes, it's device apq8016-sbc, and the error message is like below.
> >
> > [    1.317186] spmi spmi-0: PMIC arbiter version v2 (0x20010000)
> > [    1.324784] spmi spmi-0: failed to xlate sid = 0x0, periph = 0xc0,
> > irq = 0: ee=0 but owner=2
> > [    1.329430] spmi spmi-0: failed to xlate sid = 0x0, periph = 0xc0,
> > irq = 0: ee=0 but owner=2
> > [    1.337626] qcom-spmi-gpio: probe of
> > 200f000.spmi:pm8916@0:gpios@c000 failed with error -22
> >
> > I see that 'qcom,ee' property of spmi_bus is already <0>.  Is that 
> > what
> > you mean by ownership of those GPIOs?
I do not mean that. The SPMI arbiter ownership register is programmed by 
the boot-loader,
where the actual ownership is set. The same is shown in the above logs 
as owner = 2.

> > The pm8916_gpio is working fine on apq8016-sbc device with the current
> > mainline kernel.  It's not good to break the existing device without
> > a very good.  IMO, we should get this fixed before the patch is 
> > merged.
> >
> > Shawn
> > --
>
> From the logs the ownership for these GPIOs is not assigned to the
> application processor but to another master. Considering this is a
> (apq8016-sbc) APSS only platform ideally the fix for this would be to
> update the ownership table in the boot loader. The other option would
> be to make the  existing ownership check in SW optional for a platform
> via DT. I will push a patch shortly for this. Could you please give
> that a try.
>
> Thanks,
> Kiran
> > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe 
> > linux-arm-msm" 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-arm-msm" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html