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;
Date:   Tue, 23 Feb 2021 21:01:13 +0100
From:   Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>
To:     Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@samsung.com>
Cc:     Markus Reichl <m.reichl@fivetechno.de>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
        =?utf-8?B?7LWc7LCs7Jqw?= <cw00.choi@samsung.com>,
        devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
        linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Revert "ARM: dts: exynos: Remove 'opp-shared' from
 Exynos4412 bus OPP-tables"
Message-ID: <20210223200113.3irrzt2kfnuk3l24@kozik-lap>
References: <CGME20210222095419eucas1p2448e782d7df380425ab9bab5db75008d@eucas1p2.samsung.com>
 <20210222095405.3109-1-m.reichl@fivetechno.de>
 <1ed8fbd7-4aa6-f053-6627-0922420069ab@samsung.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1ed8fbd7-4aa6-f053-6627-0922420069ab@samsung.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Feb 23, 2021 at 10:24:41AM +0100, Marek Szyprowski wrote:
> Hi Markus,
> 
> On 22.02.2021 10:54, Markus Reichl wrote:
> > This reverts commit a23beead41a18c3be3ca409cb52f35bc02e601b9.
> >
> > I'm running an Odroid-X2 as headless 24/7 server.
> > With plain stable 5.10.1 I had 54 up days without problems.
> > With opp-shared removed on kernels before and now on 5.11
> > my system freezes after some days on disk activity to eMMC
> > (rsync, apt upgrade).
> >
> > The spontaneous hangs are not easy to reproduce but testing this
> > for several months now I am quite confident that there is something
> > wrong with this patch.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Markus Reichl <m.reichl@fivetechno.de>
> 
> Thanks for the report.
> 
> IMHO a straight revert is a bad idea. I would prefer to keep current opp 
> definitions and disable the affected devfreq devices (probably right bus 
> would be enough) or try to identify which transitions are responsible 
> for that issue. I know that it would take some time to identify them, 
> but that would be the best solution. Reverting leads to incorrect 
> hardware description, what in turn confuses the driver and framework, 
> what in turn hides a real problem.

I agree with this approach. If devfreq is unusable on that platform,
let's try disabling the exynos-bus nodes. It could be enough to help.
The opp-shared does not look like proper fix for this problem, but
rather a incorrect solution which achieves the same result - disabling
frequency/voltage scaling on some buses.

> 
> Another problem related to devfreq on Exynos4412 has been introduced 
> recently by the commit 86ad9a24f21e ("PM / devfreq: Add required OPPs 
> support to passive governor"). You can see lots of the messages like 
> this one:
> 
> devfreq soc:bus-acp: failed to update devfreq using passive governor
> 
> I didn't have time to check what's wrong there, but I consider devfreq 
> on Exynos a little bit broken, so another solution would be just to 
> disable it in the exynos_defconfig.

Yes, I saw it as well. However defconfig is only defconfig, so customers
still would be affected and still might report bugs for it. Maybe better
to disable all exynos-bus nodes?

Best regards,
Krzysztof