[PATCH v2 2/3] arm: exynos: Add MCPM call-back functions

Tue Apr 22 08:40:28 PDT 2014

On Tue, 22 Apr 2014, Daniel Lezcano wrote:

> On 04/22/2014 08:17 AM, Abhilash Kesavan wrote:
> > Add machine-dependent MCPM call-backs for Exynos5420. These are used
> > to power up/down the secondary CPUs during boot, shutdown, s2r and
> > switching.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Thomas Abraham <thomas.ab at samsung.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Inderpal Singh <inderpal.s at samsung.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Andrew Bresticker <abrestic at chromium.org>
> > Signed-off-by: Abhilash Kesavan <a.kesavan at samsung.com>
> > ---
> >   arch/arm/mach-exynos/Kconfig       |    8 +
> >   arch/arm/mach-exynos/Makefile      |    2 +
> >   arch/arm/mach-exynos/mcpm-exynos.c |  345
> >   ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >   arch/arm/mach-exynos/regs-pmu.h    |    2 +
> >   4 files changed, 357 insertions(+)
> >   create mode 100644 arch/arm/mach-exynos/mcpm-exynos.c
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/Kconfig b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/Kconfig
> > index fc8bf18..1602abc 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/Kconfig
> > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/Kconfig
> > @@ -110,4 +110,12 @@ config SOC_EXYNOS5440
> >
> >   endmenu
> >
> > +config EXYNOS5420_MCPM
> > +	bool "Exynos5420 Multi-Cluster PM support"
> > +	depends on MCPM && SOC_EXYNOS5420
> > +	select ARM_CCI
> > +	help
> > +	  This is needed to provide CPU and cluster power management
> > +	  on Exynos5420 implementing big.LITTLE.
> > +
> >   endif
> > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/Makefile b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/Makefile
> > index a656dbe..01bc9b9 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/Makefile
> > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/Makefile
> > @@ -29,3 +29,5 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS)	+= firmware.o
> >
> >   plus_sec := $(call as-instr,.arch_extension sec,+sec)
> >   AFLAGS_exynos-smc.o		:=-Wa,-march=armv7-a$(plus_sec)
> > +
> > +obj-$(CONFIG_EXYNOS5420_MCPM)	+= mcpm-exynos.o
> > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/mcpm-exynos.c
> > b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/mcpm-exynos.c
> > new file mode 100644
> > index 0000000..49b9031
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/mcpm-exynos.c
> > @@ -0,0 +1,345 @@
> > +/*
> > + * Copyright (c) 2014 Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.
> > + *		http://www.samsung.com
> > + *
> > + * arch/arm/mach-exynos/mcpm-exynos.c
> > + *
> > + * Based on arch/arm/mach-vexpress/dcscb.c
> > + *
> > + * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
> > + * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License version 2 as
> > + * published by the Free Software Foundation.
> > + */
> > +
> > +#include <linux/kernel.h>
> > +#include <linux/io.h>
> > +#include <linux/spinlock.h>
> > +#include <linux/uaccess.h>
> > +#include <linux/miscdevice.h>
> > +#include <linux/fs.h>
> > +#include <linux/delay.h>
> > +#include <linux/arm-cci.h>
> > +
> > +#include <asm/mcpm.h>
> > +#include <asm/cputype.h>
> > +#include <asm/cp15.h>
> > +
> > +#include <plat/cpu.h>
> > +#include "regs-pmu.h"
> > +
> > +#define EXYNOS5420_CPUS_PER_CLUSTER	4
> > +#define EXYNOS5420_NR_CLUSTERS		2
> > +
> > +/* Secondary CPU entry point */
> > +#define REG_ENTRY_ADDR		(S5P_VA_SYSRAM_NS + 0x1C)
> > +
> > +#define EXYNOS_CORE_LOCAL_PWR_EN		0x3
> > +#define EXYNOS_CORE_LOCAL_PWR_DIS		0x0
> >
> > +#define EXYNOS_ARM_COMMON_CONFIGURATION		S5P_PMUREG(0x2500)
> > +#define EXYNOS_ARM_L2_CONFIGURATION		S5P_PMUREG(0x2600)
> > +
> > +#define EXYNOS_ARM_CORE_CONFIGURATION(_nr)	\
> > +			(S5P_ARM_CORE0_CONFIGURATION + ((_nr) * 0x80))
> > +#define EXYNOS_ARM_CORE_STATUS(_nr)		\
> > +			(S5P_ARM_CORE0_STATUS + ((_nr) * 0x80))
> > +
> > +#define EXYNOS_COMMON_CONFIGURATION(_nr)	\
> > +			(EXYNOS_ARM_COMMON_CONFIGURATION + ((_nr) * 0x80))
> > +#define EXYNOS_COMMON_STATUS(_nr)		\
> > +			(EXYNOS_COMMON_CONFIGURATION(_nr) + 0x4)
> > +
> > +#define EXYNOS_L2_CONFIGURATION(_nr)		\
> > +			(EXYNOS_ARM_L2_CONFIGURATION + ((_nr) * 0x80))
> > +#define EXYNOS_L2_STATUS(_nr)			\
> > +			(EXYNOS_L2_CONFIGURATION(_nr) + 0x4)
> > +
> 
> Is it possible to share the definition of those macros with the rest of the
> code via functions, so they can be re-used for the other sub-systems ? eg:
> https://patches.linaro.org/27798/

This patch is incompatible with MCPM.  A proper idle driver on top of 
MCPM is required instead.  That's the role of MCPM i.e. arbitrate power 
requests between different requestors, including hotplug, cpuidle, and 
the b.L switcher in some cases.

> > +/*
> > + * The common v7_exit_coherency_flush API could not be used because of the
> > + * Erratum 799270 workaround. This macro is the same as the common one (in
> > + * arch/arm/include/asm/cacheflush.h) except for the erratum handling.
> > + */
> > +#define exynos_v7_exit_coherency_flush(level) \
> > +	asm volatile( \
> > +	"stmfd	sp!, {fp, ip}\n\t"\
> > +	"mrc	p15, 0, r0, c1, c0, 0	@ get SCTLR\n\t" \
> > +	"bic	r0, r0, #"__stringify(CR_C)"\n\t" \
> > +	"mcr	p15, 0, r0, c1, c0, 0	@ set SCTLR\n\t" \
> > +	"isb\n\t"\
> > +	"bl	v7_flush_dcache_"__stringify(level)"\n\t" \
> > +	"clrex\n\t"\
> > +	"mrc	p15, 0, r0, c1, c0, 1	@ get ACTLR\n\t" \
> > +	"bic	r0, r0, #(1 << 6)	@ disable local coherency\n\t" \
> > +	/* Dummy Load of a device register to avoid Erratum 799270 */ \
> 
> Wouldn't make sense to add the erratum in the Kconfig and re-use it in the
> generic v7_exit_coherency_flush macro instead of redefining it ?

The implementation of the erratum (the dummy device register load) is 
platform specific I'm afraid.

Is TC2 also concerned by this erratum, or is this Samsung specific?

> > +	"ldr	r4, [%0]\n\t" \
> > +	"and	r4, r4, #0\n\t" \
> > +	"orr	r0, r0, r4\n\t" \
> > +	"mcr	p15, 0, r0, c1, c0, 1	@ set ACTLR\n\t" \
> > +	"isb\n\t" \
> > +	"dsb\n\t" \
> > +	"ldmfd	sp!, {fp, ip}" \
> > +	: \
> > +	: "Ir" (S5P_INFORM0) \
> > +	: "r0", "r1", "r2", "r3", "r4", "r5", "r6", "r7", \
> > +	  "r9", "r10", "lr", "memory")
> 
> 
> 
> > +/*
> > + * We can't use regular spinlocks. In the switcher case, it is possible
> > + * for an outbound CPU to call power_down() after its inbound counterpart
> > + * is already live using the same logical CPU number which trips lockdep
> > + * debugging.
> > + */
> > +static arch_spinlock_t exynos_mcpm_lock = __ARCH_SPIN_LOCK_UNLOCKED;
> > +static int
> > +cpu_use_count[EXYNOS5420_CPUS_PER_CLUSTER][EXYNOS5420_NR_CLUSTERS];
> > +
> > +static bool exynos_core_power_state(unsigned int cpu, unsigned int cluster)
> > +{
> > +	unsigned int val;
> > +	unsigned int cpunr = cpu + (cluster * EXYNOS5420_CPUS_PER_CLUSTER);
> > +
> > +	val = __raw_readl(EXYNOS_ARM_CORE_STATUS(cpunr)) &
> > +				EXYNOS_CORE_LOCAL_PWR_EN;
> > +	return !!val;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static void exynos_core_power_control(unsigned int cpu, unsigned int
> > cluster,
> > +						int enable)
> > +{
> > +	unsigned int val = EXYNOS_CORE_LOCAL_PWR_DIS;
> > +	unsigned int cpunr = cpu + (cluster * EXYNOS5420_CPUS_PER_CLUSTER);
> > +
> > +	if (exynos_core_power_state(cpu, cluster) == enable)
> > +		return;
> > +
> > +	if (enable)
> > +		val = EXYNOS_CORE_LOCAL_PWR_EN;
> > +	__raw_writel(val, EXYNOS_ARM_CORE_CONFIGURATION(cpunr));
> > +}
> 
> Same comment as above about sharing these functions.
> 
> Shouldn't these functions to be reused by hotplug ?

This _is_ hotplug.  Once this MCPM backend is registered, CPU hotplug is 
automatically available.  See arch/arm/common/mcpm_platsmp.c.

Nicolas