Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <1664960824-20951-1-git-send-email-quic_akhilpo@quicinc.com> <20221201225705.46r2m35ketvzipox@builder.lan>
In-Reply-To: <20221201225705.46r2m35ketvzipox@builder.lan>
From:   Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org>
Date:   Wed, 7 Dec 2022 17:00:51 +0100
Message-ID: <CAPDyKFofsqcoFbYt-9BcisbPdreLGqAAMWorqHi0_D1kwCdYhg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 0/6] clk/qcom: Support gdsc collapse polling using
 'reset' interface
To:     Bjorn Andersson <andersson@kernel.org>,
        Akhil P Oommen <quic_akhilpo@quicinc.com>
Cc:     freedreno <freedreno@lists.freedesktop.org>,
        dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org,
        Rob Clark <robdclark@gmail.com>,
        Stephen Boyd <swboyd@chromium.org>,
        Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@linaro.org>,
        Philipp Zabel <p.zabel@pengutronix.de>,
        Douglas Anderson <dianders@chromium.org>,
        krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org,
        Abhinav Kumar <quic_abhinavk@quicinc.com>,
        Andy Gross <agross@kernel.org>,
        Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>,
        David Airlie <airlied@linux.ie>,
        Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@somainline.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org>,
        Michael Turquette <mturquette@baylibre.com>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>, Sean Paul <sean@poorly.run>,
        Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org>, devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-clk@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, 1 Dec 2022 at 23:57, Bjorn Andersson <andersson@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Oct 05, 2022 at 02:36:58PM +0530, Akhil P Oommen wrote:
> >
>
> @Ulf, Akhil has a power-domain for a piece of hardware which may be
> voted active by multiple different subsystems (co-processors/execution
> contexts) in the system.
>
> As such, during the powering down sequence we don't wait for the
> power-domain to turn off. But in the event of an error, the recovery
> mechanism relies on waiting for the hardware to settle in a powered off
> state.
>
> The proposal here is to use the reset framework to wait for this state
> to be reached, before continuing with the recovery mechanism in the
> client driver.

I tried to review the series (see my other replies), but I am not sure
I fully understand the consumer part.

More exactly, when and who is going to pull the reset and at what point?

>
> Given our other discussions on quirky behavior, do you have any
> input/suggestions on this?
>
> > Some clients like adreno gpu driver would like to ensure that its gdsc
> > is collapsed at hardware during a gpu reset sequence. This is because it
> > has a votable gdsc which could be ON due to a vote from another subsystem
> > like tz, hyp etc or due to an internal hardware signal. To allow
> > this, gpucc driver can expose an interface to the client driver using
> > reset framework. Using this the client driver can trigger a polling within
> > the gdsc driver.
>
> @Akhil, this description is fairly generic. As we've reached the state
> where the hardware has settled and we return to the client, what
> prevents it from being powered up again?
>
> Or is it simply a question of it hitting the powered-off state, not
> necessarily staying there?

Okay, so it's indeed the GPU driver that is going to assert/de-assert
the reset at some point. Right?

That seems like a reasonable approach to me, even if it's a bit
unclear under what conditions that could happen.

[...]

Kind regards
Uffe