Re: [PATCH v16 4/6] soc: qcom: rpmh: Invoke rpmh_flush() for dirty caches

[Maulik Shah]

Hi,

On 4/8/2020 8:20 AM, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> Quoting Maulik Shah (2020-04-05 23:32:19)
> > Add changes to invoke rpmh flush() from CPU PM notification.
> > This is done when the last the cpu is entering power collapse and
> > controller is not busy.
> >
> > Controllers that do have 'HW solver' mode do not need to register
> Controllers that have 'HW solver' mode don't need to register? The 'do
> have' is throwing me off.
Okay i will remove 'do' from this line.
> > for CPU PM notification. They may be in autonomous mode executing
> > low power mode and do not require rpmh_flush() to happen from CPU
> > PM notification.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Maulik Shah <mkshah@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Reviewed-by: Douglas Anderson <dianders@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >   drivers/soc/qcom/rpmh-internal.h |  25 +++++---
> >   drivers/soc/qcom/rpmh-rsc.c      | 123 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----
> >   drivers/soc/qcom/rpmh.c          |  26 +++------
> >   3 files changed, 137 insertions(+), 37 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/soc/qcom/rpmh-rsc.c b/drivers/soc/qcom/rpmh-rsc.c
> > index b718221..fbe1f3e 100644
> > --- a/drivers/soc/qcom/rpmh-rsc.c
> > +++ b/drivers/soc/qcom/rpmh-rsc.c
> > @@ -6,6 +6,7 @@
> [...]
> > +
> > +static int rpmh_rsc_cpu_pm_callback(struct notifier_block *nfb,
> > +                                   unsigned long action, void *v)
> > +{
> > +       struct rsc_drv *drv = container_of(nfb, struct rsc_drv, rsc_pm);
> > +       int ret = NOTIFY_OK;
> > +
> > +       spin_lock(&drv->pm_lock);
> > +
> > +       switch (action) {
> > +       case CPU_PM_ENTER:
> I thought CPU_PM notifiers weren't supposed to be used anymore? Or at
> least, the genpd work that has gone on for cpuidle could be used here in
> place of CPU_PM notifiers?

genpd was used in v3 and v4 of this series, where from pd's .power_off 
function, rpmh_flush() was invoked.

genpd can be useful if target firmware supports PSCI's OSI mode, while 
sc7180 is non-OSI target.

The current approch (using cpu pm notification) can be used for both OSI 
and non-OSI targets to invoke rpmh_flush() when last cpu goes to power down.

> And so this isn't actually any different
> than what was proposed originally to use genpd for this?
>
> > +               cpumask_set_cpu(raw_smp_processor_id(),
> Why do we need to use raw_smp_processor_id()? smp_processor_id() should
> work just as well?
Yes, seems it will work as well. I will change to use smp_processor_id().
> > +                               &drv->cpus_entered_pm);
> > +
> > +               if (!cpumask_equal(&drv->cpus_entered_pm, cpu_online_mask))
> > +                       goto exit;
> > +               break;
> > +       case CPU_PM_ENTER_FAILED:
> > +       case CPU_PM_EXIT:
> > +               cpumask_clear_cpu(raw_smp_processor_id(),
> > +                                 &drv->cpus_entered_pm);
> > +               goto exit;
> > +       }
> > +
> > +       ret = rpmh_rsc_ctrlr_is_busy(drv);
> > +       if (ret) {
> > +               ret = NOTIFY_BAD;
> > +               goto exit;
> > +       }
> > +
> > +       ret = rpmh_flush(&drv->client);
> > +       if (ret)
> > +               ret = NOTIFY_BAD;
> > +       else
> > +               ret = NOTIFY_OK;
> > +
> > +exit:
> > +       spin_unlock(&drv->pm_lock);
> > +       return ret;
> > +}
> > +
Thanks,
Maulik

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