[PATCH v4 14/18] arm64: dts: imx8mm: add GPC node
Lucas Stach
l.stach at pengutronix.de
Mon Oct 4 00:44:24 PDT 2021
Am Sonntag, dem 03.10.2021 um 14:21 -0700 schrieb Tim Harvey:
> On Sun, Oct 3, 2021 at 12:44 PM Lucas Stach <l.stach at pengutronix.de> wrote:
> >
> > Am Sonntag, dem 03.10.2021 um 10:17 -0700 schrieb Tim Harvey:
> > > On Sat, Oct 2, 2021 at 5:51 AM Lucas Stach <l.stach at pengutronix.de> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi Tim,
> > > >
> > > > Am Freitag, dem 01.10.2021 um 19:43 -0700 schrieb Tim Harvey:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > [...]
> > > > > > > > > > Lucas,
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I've been using your 'i.MX8MM GPC improvements and BLK_CTRL driver'
> > > > > > > > > > series for imx8mm-venice* and imx8mn-venice* boards. Thank you for
> > > > > > > > > > this work and I hope to see it merged soon!
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I have found that on the imx8mm-venice-gw7901 board which does not use
> > > > > > > > > > MIPI and thus does not connect VDD_MIPI_1P8, VDD_MIPI_1P2,
> > > > > > > > > > VDD_MIPI_0P9, MIPI_VREG_CAP pins on the IMX8MM hangs with this
> > > > > > > > > > particular patch. If I comment out the pgc_mipi domain and subsequent
> > > > > > > > > > disp_blk_ctrl node from a later patch it resolves the hang. Is this
> > > > > > > > > > behavior expected and what would your recommendation be to work around
> > > > > > > > > > it?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > No, this isn't expected. If there are no active devices in the MIPI
> > > > > > > > > domain, the power domain should not be touched, as we treat all of them
> > > > > > > > > as disabled initially. If we don't touch the domain I would expect that
> > > > > > > > > the power supply not being present shouldn't be an issue.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Can you check if something in your system causes this power domain to
> > > > > > > > > be powered up? Easiest way is probably to sprinkle a
> > > > > > > > > printk("%s\n, genpd->name) in both imx8m_blk_ctrl_power_on() and
> > > > > > > > > imx_gpc_power_on().
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Lucas,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Here's what I see before I hang (debug print on both power on/off
> > > > > > > > followed by a msleep(1000) to make sure I see it before I hang):
> > > > > > > > [ 0.518319] imx_pgc_power_up hsiomix
> > > > > > > > [ 0.624031] imx_pgc_power_down hsiomix
> > > > > > > > [ 0.731879] imx_pgc_power_up hsiomix
> > > > > > > > [ 0.839906] imx_pgc_power_down hsiomix
> > > > > > > > [ 0.947875] imx_pgc_power_up hsiomix
> > > > > > > > [ 1.055859] imx_pgc_power_down hsiomix
> > > > > > > > [ 1.057296] imx_pgc_power_up gpumix
> > > > > > > > [ 1.167884] imx_pgc_power_down gpumix
> > > > > > > > [ 0.518513] imx_pgc_power_up hsiomix
> > > > > > > > [ 0.519933] imx_pgc_power_up gpumix
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The board also has IMX8MM VDD_GPU pins not connected so it makes sense
> > > > > > > that we hang here I suppose. Yet if I add the folloiwng to
> > > > > > > imx8mm-venice-gw7901.dts it still tries to enable them and hangs:
> > > > > > > &gpu_2d {
> > > > > > > status = "disabled";
> > > > > > > };
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > &gpu_3d {
> > > > > > > status = "disabled";
> > > > > > > };
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > &vpu_blk_ctrl {
> > > > > > > status = "disabled";
> > > > > > > };
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The pgc_gpu is a "active" consumer of the pgc_gpumix domain while the
> > > > > > driver gets probed, so the driver core will power up the gpumix domain
> > > > > > for a moment during kernel init. To avoid this you must at least set
> > > > > > the status of the pgc_gpu node to disabled.
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > I've tried that and it doesn't work either.
> > > > >
> > > > > &gpu_2d {
> > > > > status = "disabled";
> > > > > };
> > > > >
> > > > > &gpu_3d {
> > > > > status = "disabled";
> > > > > };
> > > > >
> > > > > &vpu_blk_ctrl {
> > > > > status = "disabled";
> > > > > };
> > > > >
> > > > > &pgc_gpumix {
> > > > > status = "disabled";
> > > > > };
> > > > >
> > > > > &pgc_gpu {
> > > > > status = "disabled";
> > > > > };
> > > > >
> > > > > The interesting thing is that the first patch that causes this is
> > > > > 'arm64: dts: imx8mm: add GPC node' which just adds the gpc node and is
> > > > > before the addition of the other nodes. Therefore these are being
> > > > > enabled by default regardless of the above nodes being disabled (or
> > > > > not even added yet to imx8mm.dtsi).
> > > >
> > > > My bad, I didn't think about the fact that the power domain devices are
> > > > not instantiated via the common OF populate code. For the status
> > > > property to work as expected the GPCv2 code needs to check this
> > > > property. I've just sent a patch to make this happen. Can you give it
> > > > another try with your DT changes and this patch applied?
> > > >
> > >
> > > Yes, this makes sense and resolves it with only disabling pgc_gpumix in my dts.
> > >
> > > I believe it is fine for me to not specifically disable gpu_2d and
> > > gpu_3d as they are not enabled by default in imx8mm.dtsi and I don't
> > > believe that will change and I don't 'currently' need to disable
> > > disp_blk_ctrl or pgc_mipi but wondering if I should as the MIPI rails
> > > are not hooked up either? (ie will something added in the future try
> > > to use them?)
> > >
> > I think it would be better to disable the GPU devices in your DT. They
> > don't have a status property and thus are enabled by default. They
> > won't probe without the power domain being available, but it will cause
> > those devices to stay in probe deferred state forever, which may
> > confuse some users. So I guess it would be good style to disable the
> > GPU nodes.
> >
>
> it still tries to power the pgc_gpumix domain if I 'only' disable
> gpu_2d and gpu_3d. I have to disable 'pgc_gpumix' specifically - is
> that what you expect here?
>
> > One consequence of disabling the MIPI power domain is that the disp-
> > blk-ctrl driver won't probe anymore, as it needs all the referenced
> > power domains to be available. Do you think this might be an issue? Is
> > there a valid system configuration where you would use devices from
> > from the display power domain, but not the MIPI domain? If that's a
> > valid case we might need to make this configuration possible in the
> > disp-blk-ctrl driver.
>
> In the case of imx8mm I don't see that you can have any display
> without MIPI however the imx8mp can have HDMI display without needing
> MIPI so in general that should be allowed.
I was thinking about the camera input path, but this one also needs the
MIPI domain. The camera interface is useless without the MIPI PHY to
get data from. The i.MX8MP is a different topic, as the HDMI part is a
separate blk-ctrl domain there.
With that in mind, I think things are okay as they are implemented now,
as I don't see any use-case where one would want to use devices from
the DISP domain (CSI, LCDIF) without having the MIPI PHY parts
available.
Regards,
Lucas
>
> >
> > > What needs to be done to get this series merged? I suppose it's too
> > > late to get it into 5.13?
> >
> > 5.13? Way too late, even the 5.15 merge window is long closed. The
> > series is almost completely reviewed and the DT bindings are also good
> > to go. So if no one happens to run into any real showstopper, Shawn may
> > be willing to pick up the series and stage it for the 5.16 merge
> > window.
>
> oops... I meant 5.15 but yes, seems too late for that. We seem to have
> time to get this into 5.16 however. I'm not sure what Shawn's cut-off
> is there.
>
> Tim
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list