Re: [BUG] ls1046a: eDMA does not transfer data from I2C

[Sean Anderson]

On 9/20/22 7:05 PM, Sean Anderson wrote:
> 
> 
> On 9/20/22 6:49 PM, Leo Li wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Sean Anderson <sean.anderson@xxxxxxxx>
>>> Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2022 11:21 AM
>>> To: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@xxxxxxx>; Oleksij Rempel
>>> <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Pengutronix Kernel Team
>>> <kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; linux-i2c@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-arm-kernel
>>> <linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Vinod Koul <vkoul@xxxxxxxxxx>;
>>> dmaengine@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Leo Li <leoyang.li@xxxxxxx>; Laurentiu Tudor
>>> <laurentiu.tudor@xxxxxxx>
>>> Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; dri-
>>> devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Christian König <christian.koenig@xxxxxxx>;
>>> linaro-mm-sig@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Shawn Guo <shawnguo@xxxxxxxxxx>; Sumit
>>> Semwal <sumit.semwal@xxxxxxxxxx>; Joy Zou <joy.zou@xxxxxxx>; linux-
>>> media@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> Subject: Re: [BUG] ls1046a: eDMA does not transfer data from I2C
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 9/20/22 11:44 AM, Sean Anderson wrote:
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On 9/20/22 11:24 AM, Sean Anderson wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> On 9/20/22 6:07 AM, Robin Murphy wrote:
>>> >>> On 2022-09-19 23:24, Sean Anderson wrote:
>>> >>>> Hi all,
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> I discovered a bug in either imx_i2c or fsl-edma on the LS1046A
>>> >>>> where no data is read in i2c_imx_dma_read except for the last two
>>> >>>> bytes (which are not read using DMA). This is perhaps best
>>> >>>> illustrated with the following example:
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> # hexdump -C /sys/bus/nvmem/devices/0-00540/nvmem
>>> >>>> [  308.914884] i2c i2c-0: ffff000809380000 0x0000000889380000
>>> 0x00000000f5401000 ffff000075401000
>>> >>>> [  308.923529] src= 2180004 dst=f5401000 attr=   0 soff=   0 nbytes=1
>>> slast=       0
>>> >>>> [  308.923529] citer=  7e biter=  7e doff=   1 dlast_sga=       0
>>> >>>> [  308.923529] major_int=1 disable_req=1 enable_sg=0 [  308.942113]
>>> >>>> fsl-edma 2c00000.edma: vchan 000000001b4371fc: txd
>>> >>>> 00000000d9dd26c5[4]: submitted [  308.974049] fsl-edma
>>> >>>> 2c00000.edma: txd 00000000d9dd26c5[4]: marked complete [
>>> >>>> 308.981339] i2c i2c-0: ffff000809380000 = [2e 2e 2f 2e 2e 2f 2e 2e
>>> >>>> 2f 64 65 76 69 63 65 73 2f 70 6c 61 74 66 6f 72 6d 2f 73 6f 63 2f 32 31 38 30
>>> 30 30 30 2e 69 32 63 2f 69 32 63 2d 30 2f 30 2d 30 30 35 34 2f 30 2d 30 30 35 34
>>> 30 00 00] [  309.002226] i2c i2c-0: ffff000075401000 = [2e 2e 2f 2e 2e 2f 2e 2e 2f
>>> 64 65 76 69 63 65 73 2f 70 6c 61 74 66 6f 72 6d 2f 73 6f 63 2f 32 31 38 30 30 30 30
>>> 2e 69 32 63 2f 69 32 63 2d 30 2f 30 2d 30 30 35 34 2f 30 2d 30 30 35 34 30 00 00]
>>> [  309.024649] i2c i2c-0: ffff000809380080 0x0000000889380080
>>> 0x00000000f5401800 ffff000075401800
>>> >>>> [  309.033270] src= 2180004 dst=f5401800 attr=   0 soff=   0 nbytes=1
>>> slast=       0
>>> >>>> [  309.033270] citer=  7e biter=  7e doff=   1 dlast_sga=       0
>>> >>>> [  309.033270] major_int=1 disable_req=1 enable_sg=0 [  309.051633]
>>> >>>> fsl-edma 2c00000.edma: vchan 000000001b4371fc: txd
>>> >>>> 00000000d9dd26c5[5]: submitted [  309.083526] fsl-edma
>>> >>>> 2c00000.edma: txd 00000000d9dd26c5[5]: marked complete [
>>> >>>> 309.090807] i2c i2c-0: ffff000809380080 = [00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
>>> >>>> 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
>>> >>>> 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
>>> >>>> 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00] [  309.111694] i2c i2c-0:
>>> >>>> ffff000075401800 = [00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
>>> >>>> 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
>>> >>>> 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
>>> >>>> 00 00 00 00]
>>> >>>> 00000000  2e 2e 2f 2e 2e 2f 2e 2e  2f 64 65 76 69 63 65 73
>>> >>>> |../../../devices|
>>> >>>> 00000010  2f 70 6c 61 74 66 6f 72  6d 2f 73 6f 63 2f 32 31
>>> >>>> |/platform/soc/21|
>>> >>>> 00000020  38 30 30 30 30 2e 69 32  63 2f 69 32 63 2d 30 2f
>>> >>>> |80000.i2c/i2c-0/|
>>> >>>> 00000030  30 2d 30 30 35 34 2f 30  2d 30 30 35 34 30 00 00
>>> >>>> |0-0054/0-00540..|
>>> >>>> 00000040  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
>>> >>>> |................|
>>> >>>> *
>>> >>>> 00000070  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 ff ff
>>> >>>> |................|
>>> >>>> 00000080  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
>>> >>>> |................|
>>> >>>> *
>>> >>>> 000000f0  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 ff 5b
>>> >>>> |...............[|
>>> >>>> 00000100
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> (patch with my debug prints appended below)
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> Despite the DMA completing successfully, no data was copied into
>>> >>>> the buffer, leaving the original (now junk) contents. I probed the
>>> >>>> I2C bus with an oscilloscope, and I verified that the transfer did indeed
>>> occur.
>>> >>>> The timing between submission and completion seems reasonable for
>>> >>>> the bus speed (50 kHz for whatever reason).
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> I had a look over the I2C driver, and nothing looked obviously
>>> >>>> incorrect. If anyone has ideas on what to try, I'm more than willing.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Is the DMA controller cache-coherent? I see the mainline LS1046A DT
>>> doesn't have a "dma-coherent" property for it, but the behaviour is entirely
>>> consistent with that being wrong - dma_map_single() cleans the cache,
>>> coherent DMA write hits the still-present cache lines, dma_unmap_single()
>>> invalidates the cache, and boom, the data is gone and you read back the
>>> previous content of the buffer that was cleaned out to DRAM beforehand.
>>> >>
>>> >> I've tried both with and without [1] applied. I also tried removing
>>> >> the call to dma_unmap_single, but to no effect.
>>> >
>>> > Actually, I wasn't updating my device tree like I thought...
>>> >
>>> > Turns out I2C works only *without* this patch.
>>> >
>>> > So maybe the eDMA is not coherent?
>>> 
>>> It seems like this might be the case. From the reference manual:
>>> 
>>> > All transactions from eDMA are tagged as snoop configuration if the
>>> > SCFG_SNPCNFGCR[eDMASNP] bit is set. Refer Snoop Configuration
>>> Register
>>> > (SCFG_SNPCNFGCR) for details.
>>> 
>>> But there is no such bit in this register on the LS1046A. On the LS1043A, this
>>> bit does exist, but on the LS1046A it is reserved. I read the register, and
>>> found the bit was 0. Perhaps eDMA was intended to be coherent, but there
>>> was a hardware bug?
>> 
>> Thanks for the findings.  I don't know the reason why this bit is reserved on LS1046a either.  It should have a similar design as LS1043a.
> 
> Funnily enough, this bit is not set for the LS1043A either [1]. So maybe
> this is a U-Boot bug? I'll test this tomorrow.

OK, this looks like it fixes things. I'll submit a patch to U-Boot. But
this bit should really be documented in the LS1046A manual as well.

--Sean

> [1] https://source.denx.de/u-boot/u-boot/-/blob/master/arch/arm/cpu/armv8/fsl-layerscape/soc.c#L680
> 
>>> 
>>> If this is the case, then I think dma-coherent should be left out of the top-
>>> level /soc node. Instead, the qdma, sata, usb, and emmc nodes should have
>>> dma-coherent added.
>>> 
>>> Li/Laurentiu, what are your thoughts?
>> 
>> Then looks like it is not correct to say all devices on the bus is coherent.  But as we have the new "dma-noncoherent" property now and most of the devices are actually coherent, we probably can keep the bus as dma-coherent and mark exceptions with dma-noncoherent?
> 
> Neat, I didn't know about that.
> 
> Yes, that sounds good. For the moment, only i2c0 uses DMA, so we will
> only need it there. At some point, someone should send a patch enabling
> it for the rest of the I2C devices, as well as the LPUARTs and SPIs.