[PATCH 0/8] interconnect: support i.MX8MP
Lucas Stach
l.stach at pengutronix.de
Wed Jun 15 02:06:23 PDT 2022
Hi Peng,
Am Dienstag, dem 14.06.2022 um 23:38 +0000 schrieb Peng Fan:
> Hi Lucas,
>
> > Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/8] interconnect: support i.MX8MP
> >
> > Hi Peng,
> >
> > Am Montag, dem 13.06.2022 um 01:23 +0000 schrieb Peng Fan:
> > > All,
> > >
> > > > Subject: [PATCH 0/8] interconnect: support i.MX8MP
> > >
> > > I am going to send out V2 this week to address the comments until now.
> > > But before that I would like to see if any one has any comments on the
> > > design here.
> > >
> > > Georgi, do you have comments on Patch 2 " interconnect: add device
> > > managed bulk API"
> > >
> > > Lucas, since you had comments when I first use syscon to configure
> > > NoC, are you ok with the design to use interconnect in this patchset?
> > >
> > I'm still not 100% convinced that the blk-ctrl is the right consumer for the
> > interconnect, since it doesn't do any busmastering. However, the design looks
> > much better than the syscon based one.
> >
> > I mostly worry about being able to extend this to do more than the current
> > static configuration if/when NXP decides to release more information about the
> > NoC configuration options or someone reverse engineers this part of the SoC.
>
> I have asked internally, NoC documentation for i.MX8M* is not allowed to public.
>
Yea, sadly I've heard this many times from NXP.
> I
> > still hope that we could optimize NoC usage by setting real bandwidth and
> > latency limits for the devices connected to the NoC. As the blk-ctrl doesn't have
> > any clue about this right now, we can't really set any more specific requests
> > than the current INT_MAX ones.
>
> Actually looking at ATF NoC settings, the values are suggested by Design team,
> Design team give SW team such a group of value and not suggest SW team
> to change it. And the value in ATF not touch bandwidth registers, as you
> could see from the patchset, only mode,priority,ext_control are configured.
>
> Similar to qcom using static settings:
> ./drivers/interconnect/qcom/qcm2290.c:668.
> .qos.qos_mode = NOC_QOS_MODE_FIXED,
>
> I understand that people wanna tune the settings at runtime on demand.
>
Right. We had the same situation with QoS settings on the i.MX6, where
Freescale/NXP claimed that the values from the design team are optimal
and should not be changed, but we actually had some cases where tuning
those values to the specific use-case of a board was beneficial. With
the i.MX6 we could do this on our own, as things were documented, at
least partially.
I don't request you or anyone from the NXP open source team to do
something here, as I understand that the no documentation policy is an
outside decision that you can not really change. I just want to make
sure that if someone was to do something about this situation, we don't
make that change harder than necessary by locking us into a DT binding
and design that might be hard to change later on.
> > I guess we could extend things in this way by making the blk-ctrl not only be a
> > simple consumer of the interconnect, but aggregate requests from the devices
> > in the blk-ctrl domain and forward them to the NOC provider, right?
>
> I am not sure. This patchset is actually only for init NoC settings after
> power on, because the initial value is invalid.
>
> I could think how to resolve the INT_MAX settings in next version,
> For your upper suggestion, could we start after this version approved for land
> in tree?
>
I just want you to think about how we could extend the design laid down
in this patchset if/when the peripheral drivers are starting to request
their actual bandwidth usage. If the answer to this question is "we'll
simply make the blk-ctl part of the interconnect hierarchy and let it
aggregate the bandwidth requests and forward them to the NoC driver"
then I'm fine with this patchset landing in upstream as-is. I'm just
not sure if I'm overlooking something here which would prevent such an
extension of the design, as I'm not a expert in the interconnect
framework.
Regards,
Lucas
>
> Thanks,
> Peng
>
>
> >
> > Regards,
> > Lucas
> >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Peng.
> > >
> > > >
> > > > From: Peng Fan <peng.fan at nxp.com>
> > > >
> > > > This patchset is to support i.MX8MP NoC settings, i.MX8MP NoC
> > > > initial value after power up is invalid, need set a valid value after related
> > power domain up.
> > > >
> > > > This patchset also includes two patch[1,2] during my development to
> > > > enable the ICC feature for i.MX8MP.
> > > >
> > > > I not include ddrc DVFS in this patchset, ths patchset is only to
> > > > support NoC value mode/priority/ext_control being set to a valid
> > > > value that suggested by i.MX Chip Design Team. The value is same as
> > > > NXP downstream one inside Arm Trusted Firmware:
> > > > https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fso
> > > >
> > urce.codeaurora.org%2Fexternal%2Fimx%2Fimx-atf%2Ftree%2Fplat%2Fimx%2
> > > >
> > Fimx8m%2Fimx&data=05%7C01%7Cpeng.fan%40nxp.com%7C6cfad0fcec
> > 0d472
> > > >
> > 408a208da4e2cd96d%7C686ea1d3bc2b4c6fa92cd99c5c301635%7C0%7C0%7
> > C63790
> > > >
> > 8251778425186%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJ
> > QIjoiV2
> > > >
> > luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=U
> > vIx%
> > > >
> > 2BAz9rx3Z8Oy7VSCRB90O8M5VICIUaUOiTmYw%2FeI%3D&reserved=0
> > > > 8mp/gpc.c?h=lf_v2.4#n97
> > > >
> > > > A repo created here:
> > > > https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgi
> > > >
> > thub.com%2FMrVan%2Flinux%2Ftree%2Fimx8mp-interconnect&data=05
> > %7C
> > > >
> > 01%7Cpeng.fan%40nxp.com%7C6cfad0fcec0d472408a208da4e2cd96d%7C68
> > 6ea1d
> > > >
> > 3bc2b4c6fa92cd99c5c301635%7C0%7C0%7C637908251778425186%7CUnkn
> > own%7CT
> > > >
> > WFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJX
> > V
> > > >
> > CI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=W2iYPMJ6dn%2F4OTalTD2yqB
> > Hx%2Bo3%
> > > > 2BuBTuP%2BAe4bBz2Gc%3D&reserved=0
> > > >
> > > > Peng Fan (8):
> > > > dt-bindings: interconnect: imx8m: Add bindings for imx8mp noc
> > > > interconnect: add device managed bulk API
> > > > interconnect: imx: fix max_node_id
> > > > interconnect: imx: set src node
> > > > interconnect: imx: introduce imx_icc_provider
> > > > interconnect: imx: set of_node for interconnect provider
> > > > interconnect: imx: configure NoC mode/prioriry/ext_control
> > > > interconnect: imx: Add platform driver for imx8mp
> > > >
> > > > .../bindings/interconnect/fsl,imx8m-noc.yaml | 6 +
> > > > drivers/interconnect/bulk.c | 34 +++
> > > > drivers/interconnect/imx/Kconfig | 4 +
> > > > drivers/interconnect/imx/Makefile | 2 +
> > > > drivers/interconnect/imx/imx.c | 68 +++--
> > > > drivers/interconnect/imx/imx.h | 25 +-
> > > > drivers/interconnect/imx/imx8mm.c | 2 +-
> > > > drivers/interconnect/imx/imx8mn.c | 2 +-
> > > > drivers/interconnect/imx/imx8mp.c | 232
> > > > ++++++++++++++++++
> > > > drivers/interconnect/imx/imx8mq.c | 2 +-
> > > > include/dt-bindings/interconnect/fsl,imx8mp.h | 59 +++++
> > > > include/linux/interconnect.h | 6 +
> > > > 12 files changed, 424 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-) create mode
> > > > 100644 drivers/interconnect/imx/imx8mp.c create mode 100644
> > > > include/dt-bindings/interconnect/fsl,imx8mp.h
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > 2.25.1
> > >
> >
>
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list