[PATCH v2 0/9] Init runtime PM support for dw_mmc

Tue Oct 18 06:26:31 PDT 2016

Am Dienstag, 18. Oktober 2016, 19:35:31 schrieb Shawn Lin:
> 在 2016/10/18 16:46, Ulf Hansson 写道:
> > + Heiko
> > 
> > On 12 October 2016 at 04:50, Shawn Lin <shawn.lin at rock-chips.com> wrote:
> >> Hi Jaehoon and Ulf,
> >> 
> >>    This patch is gonna support runtime PM for dw_mmc.
> >> 
> >> It could support to disable ciu_clk by default and disable
> >> biu_clk if the devices are non-removeable, or removeable
> >> with gpio-base card detect.
> >> 
> >>    Then I remove the system PM since the runtime PM actually
> >> 
> >> does the same thing as it. So I help migrate the dw_mmc variant
> >> drivers to use runtime PM pairs and pm_runtime_force_*. Note
> >> that I only enable runtime PM for dw_mmc-rockchip as I will
> >> leave the decision to the owners of the corresponding drivers.
> >> I just tested it on my RK3288 platform with linux-next to make
> >> the runtime PM and system PM work fine for my emmc, sd card and
> >> sdio. But I don't have hardware to help test other variant drivers.
> >> But in theory it should work fine as I mentioned that the runtime
> >> PM does the same thing as system PM except for disabling ciu_clk
> >> aggressively which should not be related to the variant hosts.
> >> 
> >>    As you could see that I just extend the slot-gpio a bit, so the
> >> 
> >> ideal way is Ulf could pick them up with Jaehoon's ack. :)
> > 
> > The mmc core change looks fine to me, so I will wait for a pull
> > request from Jaehoon.
> > 
> >> Changes in v2:
> >> - use struct device as argument for runtime callback
> >> - use dw_mci_runtime_* directly
> >> - use dw_mci_runtime_* directly
> >> - minor fix since I change the argument for dw_mci_runtime_*
> >> - use dw_mci_runtime_* directly
> >> - use dw_mci_runtime_* directly
> >> 
> >> Shawn Lin (9):
> >>   mmc: dw_mmc: add runtime PM callback
> >>   mmc: dw_mmc-rockchip: add runtime PM support
> >>   mmc: core: expose the capability of gpio card detect
> >>   mmc: dw_mmc: disable biu clk if possible
> >>   mmc: dw_mmc-k3: deploy runtime PM facilities
> >>   mmc: dw_mmc-exynos: deploy runtime PM facilities
> >>   mmc: dw_mmc-pci: deploy runtime PM facilities
> >>   mmc: dw_mmc-pltfm: deploy runtime PM facilities
> >>   mmc: dw_mmc: remove system PM callback
> >>  
> >>  drivers/mmc/core/slot-gpio.c       |  8 +++++++
> >>  drivers/mmc/host/dw_mmc-exynos.c   | 24 +++++++++-----------
> >>  drivers/mmc/host/dw_mmc-k3.c       | 39 ++++++++------------------------
> >>  drivers/mmc/host/dw_mmc-pci.c      | 29 ++++++++----------------
> >>  drivers/mmc/host/dw_mmc-pltfm.c    | 28 +++++++----------------
> >>  drivers/mmc/host/dw_mmc-rockchip.c | 42
> >>  +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
> >>  drivers/mmc/host/dw_mmc.c          | 46
> >>  +++++++++++++++++++++++++------------- drivers/mmc/host/dw_mmc.h       
> >>    |  6 ++---
> >>  include/linux/mmc/slot-gpio.h      |  1 +
> >>  9 files changed, 117 insertions(+), 106 deletions(-)
> > 
> > Overall these changes looks good to me, so I am ready to accept the PR
> > from Jaehoon!!
> > 
> > 
> > Although, highly related to this patchset, I am worried that there is
> > a misunderstanding on how MMC_PM_KEEP_POWER (DT binding
> > "keep-power-in-suspend") is being used for dw_mmc. Perhaps I am wrong,
> > but I would appreciate if you could elaborate a bit for my
> > understanding.
> > 
> > First, this cap is solely intended to be used for controllers which
> > may have SDIO cards attached, as it indicates those cards may be
> > configured to be powered on while the system enters suspend state. By
> > looking at some DTS files, for example
> > arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3368-orion-r68-meta.dts which uses it
> > for an eMMC slot, this is clearly being abused.
> 
> Indeed. In general, it should be copy-paste issues as folks maybe write
> their dts referring to the exist dts there. So yes, I will do some
> cleanup work for them in prevent of further spread of abused code.

late to the party, but a copy-paste mistake were my thoughts as well.
Thanks Shawn for providing the patch cleaning that up.

Heiko

> > Anyway, the wrong DT configurations might not be a big deal, as in
> > dw_mci_resume(), it's not the capabilities bit that is checked but the
> > corresponding "pm_flag". This flag is set via calling
> > sdio_set_host_pm_flags(), but as that doesn't happen for an eMMC card
> > we should be fine, right!?
> > 
> > Now, what also do puzzles me, is exactly that piece of code in
> > dw_mci_resume() that is being executed *when* the pm_flag contains
> > MMC_PM_KEEP_POWER:
> > if (slot->mmc->pm_flags & MMC_PM_KEEP_POWER) {
> > 
> >      dw_mci_set_ios(slot->mmc, &slot->mmc->ios);
> >      dw_mci_setup_bus(slot, true);
> > 
> > }
> > 
> > So, in the system resume path, the above do makes sense as you need to
> > restore the registers etc for the dw_mmc controller to enable it to
> > operate the SDIO card. Such as bus width, clocks, etc.
> > 
> > Although, I would expect something similar would be needed in the new
> > runtime resume path as well. And in particular also for eMMC/SD cards,
> > as you need to restore the dw_mmc registers to be able to operate the
> > card again. Don't you?
> 
> yes, we do.
> 
> > So in the end, perhaps you should *always* call dw_mci_set_ios() and
> > dw_mci_setup_bus() in dw_mci_resume() instead of conditionally check
> > for MMC_PM_KEEP_POWER? Or maybe only a subset of those functions?
> 
> Thanks for noticing this.
> 
> Personally, I realize there is no need to check MMC_PM_KEEP_POWER but
> it could be highly related to the cost of S-2-R, I guess. I just checked
> sdhci and saw the similar cases you mentioned at the first glance.
> Maybe I'm wrong but I need more time to investigate this issue later.
> 
> There are still some on-going cleanup work for dw_mmc listed on my TODO
> list, including bugfix, legacy/redundant code etc.. So I will check this
> one either. Maybe Jaehoon could also do some stree test on enxyos
> platforms. :)
> 
> > Kind regards
> > Uffe