Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20210121225712.1118239-1-saravanak@google.com>
 <CGME20210204115252eucas1p2d145686f7a5dc7e7a04dddd0b0f2286c@eucas1p2.samsung.com>
 <20210121225712.1118239-3-saravanak@google.com> <9692dfc9-4c63-71c9-b52b-d0feba466695@samsung.com>
 <CAGETcx_KDA55Ti=5CHw48BP1L2Xo64=AFFe+17g27n=P-KUrow@mail.gmail.com>
 <6b606a5d-0435-1e9d-ac61-a8dacf051067@samsung.com> <CAMuHMdWqZonpeyk59b=o_3EKOQx4TxUZE4Jeo-Kxy_o_3CQvnQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAGETcx9Rqa7PygjSiQvadm7C2bpxS2rCf5oB_pFhjh+ESV-WQA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAGETcx9Rqa7PygjSiQvadm7C2bpxS2rCf5oB_pFhjh+ESV-WQA@mail.gmail.com>
From:   Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>
Date:   Fri, 5 Feb 2021 11:20:26 +0100
Message-ID: <CAMuHMdUt4tSEO_Hcf4AgVY_jqZ6Bsyk2+f2P3gQRQk0UfgSSjQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] of: property: Add fw_devlink support for interrupts
To:     Saravana Kannan <saravanak@google.com>
Cc:     Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@samsung.com>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
        Frank Rowand <frowand.list@gmail.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        linux-tegra <linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org>,
        "open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS" 
        <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>,
        Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@baylibre.com>,
        Jon Hunter <jonathanh@nvidia.com>,
        Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>,
        Kevin Hilman <khilman@baylibre.com>,
        Android Kernel Team <kernel-team@android.com>,
        Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>,
        Thierry Reding <treding@nvidia.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

Hi Saravana,

On Fri, Feb 5, 2021 at 11:06 AM Saravana Kannan <saravanak@google.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 5, 2021 at 12:06 AM Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org> wrote:
> > On Fri, Feb 5, 2021 at 8:38 AM Marek Szyprowski
> > <m.szyprowski@samsung.com> wrote:
> > > On 04.02.2021 22:31, Saravana Kannan wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Feb 4, 2021 at 3:52 AM Marek Szyprowski
> > > > <m.szyprowski@samsung.com> wrote:
> > > >> On 21.01.2021 23:57, Saravana Kannan wrote:
> > > >>> This allows fw_devlink to create device links between consumers of an
> > > >>> interrupt and the supplier of the interrupt.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Cc: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
> > > >>> Cc: Kevin Hilman <khilman@baylibre.com>
> > > >>> Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
> > > >>> Reviewed-by: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>
> > > >>> Reviewed-by: Thierry Reding <treding@nvidia.com>
> > > >>> Reviewed-by: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>
> > > >>> Signed-off-by: Saravana Kannan <saravanak@google.com>
> > > >> This patch landed some time ago in linux-next as commit 4104ca776ba3
> > > >> ("of: property: Add fw_devlink support for interrupts"). It breaks MMC
> > > >> host controller operation on ARM Juno R1 board (the mmci@50000 device
> > > >> defined in arch/arm64/boot/dts/arm/juno-motherboard.dtsi). I didn't
> > > > I grepped around and it looks like the final board file is this or
> > > > whatever includes it?
> > > > arch/arm64/boot/dts/arm/juno-base.dtsi
> > > The final board file is arch/arm64/boot/dts/arm/juno-r1.dts
> > > > This patch just finds the interrupt-parent and then tries to use that
> > > > as a supplier if "interrupts" property is listed. But the only
> > > > interrupt parent I can see is:
> > > >          gic: interrupt-controller@2c010000 {
> > > >                  compatible = "arm,gic-400", "arm,cortex-a15-gic";
> > > >
> > > > And the driver uses IRQCHIP_DECLARE() and hence should be pretty much
> > > > a NOP since those suppliers are never devices and are ignored.
> > > > $ git grep "arm,gic-400" -- drivers/
> > > > drivers/irqchip/irq-gic.c:IRQCHIP_DECLARE(gic_400, "arm,gic-400", gic_of_init);
> > > >
> > > > This doesn't make any sense. Am I looking at the right files? Am I
> > > > missing something?
> > >
> > > Okay, I've added displaying a list of deferred devices when mounting
> > > rootfs fails and got following items:
> > >
> > > Deferred devices:
> > > 18000000.ethernet        platform: probe deferral - supplier
> > > bus@8000000:motherboard-bus not ready
> > > 1c050000.mmci    amba: probe deferral - supplier
> > > bus@8000000:motherboard-bus not ready
> > > 1c1d0000.gpio    amba: probe deferral - supplier
> > > bus@8000000:motherboard-bus not ready
> > > 2b600000.iommu   platform: probe deferral - wait for supplier
> > > scpi-power-domains
> > > 7ff50000.hdlcd   platform: probe deferral - wait for supplier scpi-clk
> > > 7ff60000.hdlcd   platform: probe deferral - wait for supplier scpi-clk
> > > 1c060000.kmi     amba: probe deferral - supplier
> > > bus@8000000:motherboard-bus not ready
> > > 1c070000.kmi     amba: probe deferral - supplier
> > > bus@8000000:motherboard-bus not ready
> > > 1c170000.rtc     amba: probe deferral - supplier
> > > bus@8000000:motherboard-bus not ready
> > > 1c0f0000.wdt     amba: probe deferral - supplier
> > > bus@8000000:motherboard-bus not ready
> > > gpio-keys
> > > Kernel panic - not syncing: VFS: Unable to mount root fs on
> > > unknown-block(0,0)
> > >
> > > I don't see the 'bus@8000000:motherboard-bus' on the deferred devices
> > > list, so it looks that device core added a link to something that is not
> > > a platform device...
>
> Probe deferred devices (even platform devices) not showing up in that
> list is not unusual. That's because devices end up on that list only
> after a driver for them is matched and then it fails.
>
> > Lemme guess: bus@8000000 is a simple bus, but it has an
> > interrupt-map, and the devlink code doesn't follow the mapping?
> >
>
> No, what's happening is that (and this is something I just learned)
> that if a parent has an "#interrupt-cells" property, it becomes your
> interrupt parent. In this case, the motherboard-bus (still a platform
> device) is the parent, but it never probes (because it's simple-bus
> and "arm,vexpress,v2p-p1"). But it becomes the interrupt parent. And
> this mmci device is marked as a consumer of this bus (while still a
> grand-child). Yeah, I'm working on patches (multiple rewrites) to take
> care of cases like this.

One more reason to scrap the different handling of "simple-bus" and
"simple-pm-bus", and use drivers/bus/simple-pm-bus.c, which is a
platform device driver, for both? (like I originally intended ;-)

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

                        Geert

-- 
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
                                -- Linus Torvalds