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: <20210611101540.3379937-1-dmitry.baryshkov@linaro.org>
 <20210611101540.3379937-3-dmitry.baryshkov@linaro.org> <CAPDyKFo5mUZZcPum9A5mniYSsbG2KBxqw628M622FaP+piG=Pw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAA8EJprSj8FUuHkFUcinrbfd3oukeLqOivWianBrnt_9Si8ZRQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAPDyKFoMC_7kJx_Wb4LKgxvRCoqHYFtwsJ2b7Cr4OvjA94DtHg@mail.gmail.com>
 <YMjNaM0z+OzhAeO/@yoga> <CAPDyKFo_eNwEx5rryg3bHt_-pxBeeYfVrUZuTOHoL-x94LBwDA@mail.gmail.com>
 <c6e99362-56c1-f2bd-7170-7b001e0f96fe@linaro.org> <YNs3q0HI1WKrKOXx@yoga> <CAPDyKFqSwPn7wUXB9mayT78hshDFBK+DO7cqbmZRjXNAJDQfZw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAPDyKFqSwPn7wUXB9mayT78hshDFBK+DO7cqbmZRjXNAJDQfZw@mail.gmail.com>
From:   Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@linaro.org>
Date:   Thu, 1 Jul 2021 14:01:10 +0300
Message-ID: <CAA8EJpoOFyFh8vp4Q5w0DMT7-1MrN930gQiv6dk-Mu05B2dT3Q@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] PM: domain: use per-genpd lockdep class
To:     Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org>
Cc:     Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@linaro.org>,
        Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>,
        Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
        Kevin Hilman <khilman@kernel.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        Linux PM <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Rajendra Nayak <rnayak@codeaurora.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, 1 Jul 2021 at 13:07, Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 29 Jun 2021 at 17:09, Bjorn Andersson
> <bjorn.andersson@linaro.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon 28 Jun 14:55 CDT 2021, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > On 17/06/2021 12:07, Ulf Hansson wrote:
> > > > + Rajendra
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, 15 Jun 2021 at 17:55, Bjorn Andersson
> > > > <bjorn.andersson@linaro.org> wrote:
> > [..]
> > > > > But I am unable to find a way for the gdsc driver to get hold of the
> > > > > struct generic_pm_domain of the resources exposed by the rpmhpd driver.
> > > >
> > > > You don't need a handle to the struct generic_pm_domain, to assign a
> > > > parent/child domain. Instead you can use of_genpd_add_subdomain(),
> > > > which takes two "struct of_phandle_args*" corresponding to the
> > > > parent/child device nodes of the genpd providers and then let genpd
> > > > internally do the look up.
> > >
> > [..]
> > >
> > > I think I'd need this function anyway for the gdsc code. During gdsc_init()
> > > we check gdsc status and this requires register access (and thus powering on
> > > the parent domain) before the gdsc is registered itself as a power domain.
> > >
> >
> > But this is a register access in the dispcc block, which is the context
> > that our gdsc_init() operates. So describing that MMCX is the
> > power-domain for dispcc should ensure that the power-domain is enabled.
>
> Right.
>
> As a note, when we assign a child domain to a parent domain, via
> of_genpd_add_subdomain() for example - and the child domain has been
> powered on, this requires the parent domain to be turned on as well.

Most probably we should also teach genpd code to call pm_runtime
functions on respective devices when the genpd is powered on or off.
For now I had to do this manually.

>
> >
> > We do however need to make sure that dispcc doesn't hog its
> > power-domain, and that any register accesses in runtime is done with the
> > parenting power-domain enabled. E.g. the clock framework wraps all
> > operations in pm_runtime_get/put(), but I don't see anything in the
> > gnepd code for this.
> >
> >
> > And for gcc I'm worried that we might have some GDSCs that are parented
> > by CX and some by MX, but I do still think that the register accesses
> > are only related to one of these.
> >
> > But this seems like a continuation of the special case in dispcc, so I
> > think we should be able to focus on getting that right before we attempt
> > the general case (and I don't know if we have a need for this today).
> >
> > Regards,
> > Bjorn
>
> Unfortunately, I didn't understand all the above things.
>
> In any case, please tell me if there is anything else that blocks you
> from moving forward with the power domain conversion? I am happy to
> help.

Patch series was submitted:
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-msm/20210630133149.3204290-1-dmitry.baryshkov@linaro.org/


-- 
With best wishes
Dmitry