[PATCH 3/4] memory: mtk-smi: Add sleep ctrl function

[Yong Wu]

Hi AngeloGioacchino,

Thanks for your review.

On Mon, 2021-12-06 at 16:08 +0100, AngeloGioacchino Del Regno wrote:
> Il 03/12/21 07:40, Yong Wu ha scritto:
> > sleep control means that when the larb go to sleep, we should wait
> > a bit
> > until all the current commands are finished. thus, when the larb
> > runtime
> > suspend, we need enable this function to wait until all the existed
> > command are finished. when the larb resume, just disable this
> > function.
> > This function only improve the safe of bus. Add a new flag for this
> > function. Prepare for mt8186.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Anan Sun <anan.sun at mediatek.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Yong Wu <yong.wu at mediatek.com>
> > ---
> >   drivers/memory/mtk-smi.c | 39
> > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----
> >   1 file changed, 35 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

[snip]

> >   static int __maybe_unused mtk_smi_larb_suspend(struct device
> > *dev)
> >   {
> >   	struct mtk_smi_larb *larb = dev_get_drvdata(dev);
> > +	int ret = 0;
> > +
> > +	if (MTK_SMI_CAPS(larb->larb_gen->flags_general,
> > MTK_SMI_FLAG_SLEEP_CTL))
> > +		ret = mtk_smi_larb_sleep_ctrl(dev, true);
> 
> Sorry but what happens if SLP_PROT_RDY is not getting set properly?
>  From what I can understand in the commit description that you wrote,
> if we reach
> the timeout, then the LARB transactions are not over....
> 
> I see that you are indeed returning a failure here, but you are also
> turning off
> the clocks regardless of whether we get a failure or a success; I'm
> not sure that
> this is right, as this may leave the hardware in an unpredictable
> state (since
> there were some more LARB transactions that didn't go through),
> leading to crashes
> at system resume (or when retyring to suspend).

Thanks for this question. In theory you are right. In this case, the
bus already hang.

We only printed a fail log in this patch. If this fail happens, we
should request the master to check which case cause the larb hang.

If the master has a good reason or limitation, the hang is expected, I
think we have to add larb reset in this fail case: Reset the larb when
the larb runtime resume.

Fortunately, we have never got this issue. We could add this reset when
necessary. Is this OK for you?

Thanks.

> 
> >   
> >   	clk_bulk_disable_unprepare(larb->smi.clk_num, larb->smi.clks);
> > -	return 0;
> > +	return ret;
> >   }
> >   
> >   static const struct dev_pm_ops smi_larb_pm_ops = {
> > 
> 
>