From: Mukesh Ojha <mukesh.ojha@oss.qualcomm.com>
To: Manivannan Sadhasivam <mani@kernel.org>
Cc: manivannan.sadhasivam@linaro.org, jassisinghbrar@gmail.com,
linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] mailbox: qcom-ipcc: Reset CLEAR_ON_RECV_RD if set from boot firmware
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2025 12:32:40 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Z5cvkKPF+6WXJZtM@hu-mojha-hyd.qualcomm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250124075646.oc6ni5gp6c23ozp7@thinkpad>
On Fri, Jan 24, 2025 at 01:26:46PM +0530, Manivannan Sadhasivam wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 30, 2024 at 01:24:25PM +0530, Mukesh Ojha wrote:
> > For some SoCs, boot firmware is using the same IPCC instance used
> > by Linux and it has kept CLEAR_ON_RECV_RD set which basically means
> > interrupt pending registers are cleared when RECV_ID is read and the
> > register automatically updates to the next pending interrupt/client
> > status based on priority.
> >
> > Clear the CLEAR_ON_RECV_RD if it is set from the boot firmware.
> >
>
> Any user visible implications due to this?
>
User visible impact is the case of missing interrupt.
We are accessing IPCC_REG_RECV_ID register both from qcom_ipcc_irq_fn()
and from qcom_ipcc_pm_resume() and for some reason if
qcom_ipcc_pm_resume() run just millisecond before qcom_ipcc_irq_fn after
assertion of interrupt from the remote, qcom_ipcc_pm_resume reads the
IPCC_REG_RECV_ID and clears it and when the same register read from the
qcom_ipcc_irq_fn() it does not see the interrupt.
> > Signed-off-by: Mukesh Ojha <mukesh.ojha@oss.qualcomm.com>
> > ---
> > Change in v2:
> > - Corrected email id in the Sob.
> >
> > drivers/mailbox/qcom-ipcc.c | 16 ++++++++++++++++
> > 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/mailbox/qcom-ipcc.c b/drivers/mailbox/qcom-ipcc.c
> > index 14c7907c6632..0b17a38ea6bf 100644
> > --- a/drivers/mailbox/qcom-ipcc.c
> > +++ b/drivers/mailbox/qcom-ipcc.c
> > @@ -14,6 +14,7 @@
> > #include <dt-bindings/mailbox/qcom-ipcc.h>
> >
> > /* IPCC Register offsets */
> > +#define IPCC_REG_CONFIG 0x08
> > #define IPCC_REG_SEND_ID 0x0c
> > #define IPCC_REG_RECV_ID 0x10
> > #define IPCC_REG_RECV_SIGNAL_ENABLE 0x14
> > @@ -21,6 +22,7 @@
> > #define IPCC_REG_RECV_SIGNAL_CLEAR 0x1c
> > #define IPCC_REG_CLIENT_CLEAR 0x38
> >
> > +#define IPCC_CLEAR_ON_RECV_RD BIT(0)
> > #define IPCC_SIGNAL_ID_MASK GENMASK(15, 0)
> > #define IPCC_CLIENT_ID_MASK GENMASK(31, 16)
> >
> > @@ -274,6 +276,7 @@ static int qcom_ipcc_pm_resume(struct device *dev)
> > static int qcom_ipcc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > {
> > struct qcom_ipcc *ipcc;
> > + u32 config_value;
> > static int id;
> > char *name;
> > int ret;
> > @@ -288,6 +291,19 @@ static int qcom_ipcc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > if (IS_ERR(ipcc->base))
> > return PTR_ERR(ipcc->base);
> >
> > + /*
> > + * It is possible that boot firmware is using the same IPCC instance
> > + * as of the HLOS and it has kept CLEAR_ON_RECV_RD set which basically
> > + * means Interrupt pending registers are cleared when RECV_ID is read.
> > + * The register automatically updates to the next pending interrupt/client
> > + * status based on priority.
> > + */
> > + config_value = readl(ipcc->base + IPCC_REG_CONFIG);
> > + if (config_value & IPCC_CLEAR_ON_RECV_RD) {
>
> Can't you just clear this bit always?
We can do, but i wanted to be explicit here that something been done
from bootloader which Linux would need to clear.
I see this patch is merged in mainline.
-Mukesh
>
> - Mani
>
> --
> மணிவண்ணன் சதாசிவம்
prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-01-27 7:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-12-30 7:54 Mukesh Ojha
2025-01-20 6:33 ` Mukesh Ojha
2025-01-24 7:56 ` Manivannan Sadhasivam
2025-01-27 7:02 ` Mukesh Ojha [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=Z5cvkKPF+6WXJZtM@hu-mojha-hyd.qualcomm.com \
--to=mukesh.ojha@oss.qualcomm.com \
--cc=jassisinghbrar@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mani@kernel.org \
--cc=manivannan.sadhasivam@linaro.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®