Received: by 2002:a05:6a10:d5a5:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id gn37csp264341pxb; Wed, 6 Oct 2021 04:38:26 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzAOd+OYSU/B0xRfpCX7EEndEppfwlD44QPLVK7gOVTC/8ZzXewI8M5b73gnn9llMoXWQZ5 X-Received: by 2002:a17:90a:b706:: with SMTP id l6mr10381254pjr.200.1633520306057; Wed, 06 Oct 2021 04:38:26 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1633520306; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=lThBCHkKyItcIovB191iNwzw9bm8TnSuOLRRb7YE5vp2ScVAyitTpDVQ9FT0rIvvOv ICQTY6Fh2VOoEeWLiq6OIswD9aLhHHw85yuonSt6kYlKQUrFJRrpvQGLJDal5wnbC6Bi t4ZCE/zTnnPwlXbsw5l663AzmwsppOXyub1W6eXKM9in0gNshqSe57cTs8l+JKLlVBdB 36qv9v4JJmACepmh1Z8UU3uBxP+PpTtKQZ4sWHzv124i8c0OybxiYSImSNAd79lznRXh uxcpkbDxWp8AXh+gLhMqvDZ30eLlENX8bS3xq0gkBkHVtHwk4E7FjrU5GYKyZAkQoRAv g8zg== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to :references:mime-version:dkim-signature; bh=3fmM+3ryYWmUMhh0+YhTK1QvjKcGmEr05J1foyEEmgA=; b=cm+RcEU+RZw2X8SlpquF8ksoVfdmzdaA9l+Zep04MvxYIB0n11g8RZA8JI9MLqpvAx mfo+uTr8bgwf3BIrsSoVk1RVeYPJ9Xen6l6Bwov3/HL5Iv+CA6hbv6cPxqV3MOO8n8L+ xNqaw3x0YQtfKr4yzgflgIhW2QW+09VxjFzbsS4cwTONOH1vXnOC9I3gQNwYxA/Yg+De +0s3fO/8ZY+H5kcAysM2xSOG7jwmjE9ZmSry0l2AF9h1rD8DGrqiovSvMmUWsBF3E56H E4YYNTU+jMrVa2YkB7vbQ5+2aLbfrl86jEc5g3IiCxRTweXmm+nZGhKCrsH8pseIloJF tDiA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@canonical.com header.s=20210705 header.b=UYXbs3wt; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=canonical.com Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [23.128.96.18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id h187si6827056pfg.363.2021.10.06.04.38.12; Wed, 06 Oct 2021 04:38:26 -0700 (PDT) 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; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@canonical.com header.s=20210705 header.b=UYXbs3wt; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=canonical.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S238290AbhJFLhm (ORCPT + 99 others); Wed, 6 Oct 2021 07:37:42 -0400 Received: from smtp-relay-internal-1.canonical.com ([185.125.188.123]:46168 "EHLO smtp-relay-internal-1.canonical.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S238306AbhJFLhj (ORCPT ); Wed, 6 Oct 2021 07:37:39 -0400 Received: from mail-ed1-f72.google.com (mail-ed1-f72.google.com [209.85.208.72]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by smtp-relay-internal-1.canonical.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E2AC73F32F for ; Wed, 6 Oct 2021 11:35:46 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=canonical.com; s=20210705; t=1633520146; bh=3fmM+3ryYWmUMhh0+YhTK1QvjKcGmEr05J1foyEEmgA=; h=MIME-Version:References:In-Reply-To:From:Date:Message-ID:Subject: To:Cc:Content-Type; b=UYXbs3wtzn8T5QRsnlFdZsEW2ImEMzpzhTuMx0KKOu4z6M1TQYQ0aKSwVmzYLzsg1 5jVz6IvZmNUAuYvKCNHSdI8G163WX9X0DG+chXf8m0JsUWDT3pnYognWmzHyIAHzcx 7j0Xsn7zuoGaBzeV3wZzGOXlh/y8CpaUyj4G5tn9ba3tTCFmGV12c4z3vIDl+fVugc eleM5hf5AaiQU4qcQe+URFji1uLGSCaXGx0YTzPU+086AcwEIJUoLdzQXptrzg5N/c /47bBeH9X5JOFGPCaElMpUDh1yutaD6UEpK4CxTIGc7WriaqYz5iH63sBXZixwoe95 9I/4jbvrfQ3WA== Received: by mail-ed1-f72.google.com with SMTP id c7-20020a05640227c700b003d27f41f1d4so2320305ede.16 for ; Wed, 06 Oct 2021 04:35:46 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=3fmM+3ryYWmUMhh0+YhTK1QvjKcGmEr05J1foyEEmgA=; b=yhIv8gqnK5+hjGaMooKoc4ehxBAPjORkI/a0ZnQZy3VFvS2fYaFOgVrRQc0DbVajbB Vk8JMm6EnLrw6f2nB3UOAfZsH5h/JSn6tZcjWZ7al0nbULtehsS8VlTr/Kc62t9ZMO0z 9u6miA5gGG3riXzvng/dtoM8CvrjoCfZ2+kqBuR1MG3Z1vpQMzcn+Hn7Hdpm7WQR/mey 1WskF7GvZTntnaudJUOcHw0oRTjiM0yZw0jaFWsT0eJIUffnMDR2zQ3jQJEDuzFy9gMU FATTvGW8TqYRv6K3sAhBaRpxnPPHt7cQ2XE64a5m7qNPiLbH3KBe+Tq2NpWfluCKGmK2 fN/A== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532V+YVMzeWOLcKD4DiW8nsh1Ez+LaV4VUpiJ7vtsB0OnuyOczIP TadW5I5h7XCzl9llO8OsomDOzUtJbzDEWBEiaHxtw3ERxaoT9DZ7N90nawfNIXuZLuO2B5Cefmb nZbrm7/XgcAoH7Rj6rbxgX1CyQwPzU6hS4IkYNipzm1z9gPzoBzSA232U1g== X-Received: by 2002:a50:da49:: with SMTP id a9mr34599525edk.281.1633520146576; Wed, 06 Oct 2021 04:35:46 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 2002:a50:da49:: with SMTP id a9mr34599495edk.281.1633520146393; Wed, 06 Oct 2021 04:35:46 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20210921053356.1705833-1-alexandre.ghiti@canonical.com> In-Reply-To: From: Alexandre Ghiti Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2021 13:35:35 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] drivers: mfd: da9063: Add restart notifier implementation To: Adam Thomson Cc: David Abdurachmanov , Support Opensource , Lee Jones , "linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Oct 6, 2021 at 11:30 AM Adam Thomson wrote: > > On 05 October 2021 14:43, Alexandre Ghiti wrote: > > > > > > Thanks for the pointer! I have just tested this sequence from the > > > > > u-boot shell, it resets the board correctly. But then if we try to > > > > > power down the board by a long press to the corresponding button on > > > > > the board within 16 seconds, it resets the board: so we cannot > > > > > shutdown the board in the next 16 seconds that follow this sequence. > > > > > > > > > > Maybe that can be resolved by using the one-shot alarm as described by > > > > > Adam, I'll try to find that in the datasheet. > > > > > > > > After configuring the one-shot alarm, I still have those intempestive > > > > reboots if I try to power down the board by a long press within 16 > > > > seconds. The only thing I found in the datasheet regarding this timing > > > > is in case of power undervoltage, not sure how this is linked to what > > > > I see. > > > > > > > > @Adam Thomson Any ideas? > > > > > > Nothing immediately springs to mind. Can you confirm this is the nONKEY long > > > press that you're attempting here, which is resetting the board rather than > > > shutting down? > > > > Yes, this is the nONKEY long press that, if done within ~16sec after > > the board is reset using the alarm, resets the board instead of > > shutting it down. > > > > > > > > Also, would you able to again provide events and fault log when this unwanted > > > reset occurs, just in case there's anything there to give a clue. Can then > > > discuss internally to see if we can ascertain what might be happening here. > > > > FAULT_LOG = 0x60 > > EVENT_A = 0x12 > > EVENT_B to EVENT_D = 0 > > > > But I'm unsure of those values since they are the same after the reset > > triggered by the one-shot alarm *and* if I clear EVENT_A, the > > intempestive reboot does not appear! > > Thanks for the info. So we believe, based on the event registers values > provided, it is the RTC event as that's not cleared by a power-cycle (it's in > the always-on domain). The other test would be to mask this event immediately > after an RTC based reboot and see if the long key-press then shuts down the > device. I suspect it would in that case, as per you clearing the event. Indeed if I mask the RTC alarm in IRQ_MASK_A, the intempestive reboot disappears. But that's not something we can do: the reset driver will actually be implemented in openSBI at some point where the devices are probed on-demand (the same applies to u-boot I think), so we cannot clear or mask anything at boot. > > I'm still curious as to the 16 seconds though. Would that be when the kernel > finally starts and masks/clears events (seems quite a long time)? No, the kernel is not up yet. Maybe 16sec is not the right value, I may have been influenced by the discussion here https://www.dialog-semiconductor.com/products/pmics?post_id=10052#tab-support_tab_content. It seems there is some consensus about having this reset driver be a SiFive Unmatched board specific thing: quid of the sequence I propose in this patch then? It does not mess with the RTC registers, it reboots reliably and there's no intempestive reboot: is it dangerous to use? Or do you have another alternative? Thanks, Alex