mbox series

[00/12] soc: mediatek: pm-domains: Add new driver for SCPSYS power domains controller

Message ID 20200910172826.3074357-1-enric.balletbo@collabora.com (mailing list archive)
Headers show
Series soc: mediatek: pm-domains: Add new driver for SCPSYS power domains controller | expand

Message

Enric Balletbo i Serra Sept. 10, 2020, 5:28 p.m. UTC
Dear all,

This is a new driver with the aim to deprecate the mtk-scpsys driver.
The problem with that driver is that, in order to support more Mediatek
SoCs you need to add some logic to handle properly the power-up
sequence of newer Mediatek SoCs, doesn't handle parent-child power
domains and need to hardcode all the clocks in the driver itself. The
result is that the driver is getting bigger and bigger every time a
new SoC needs to be supported.

All this information can be getted from a properly defined binding, so
can be cleaner and smaller, hence, we implemented a new driver. For
now, only MT8173 and MT8183 is supported but should be fairly easy to
add support for new SoCs.

Best regards,
  Enric

Enric Balletbo i Serra (4):
  dt-bindings: power: Add bindings for the Mediatek SCPSYS power domains
    controller
  soc: mediatek: Add MediaTek SCPSYS power domains
  arm64: dts: mediatek: Add mt8173 power domain controller
  dt-bindings: power: Add MT8183 power domains

Matthias Brugger (8):
  soc: mediatek: pm-domains: Add bus protection protocol
  soc: mediatek: pm_domains: Make bus protection generic
  soc: mediatek: pm-domains: Add SMI block as bus protection block
  soc: mediatek: pm-domains: Add extra sram control
  soc: mediatek: pm-domains: Add subsystem clocks
  soc: mediatek: pm-domains: Allow bus protection to ignore clear ack
  soc: mediatek: pm-domains: Add support for mt8183
  arm64: dts: mediatek: Add mt8183 power domains controller

 .../power/mediatek,power-controller.yaml      | 173 ++++
 arch/arm64/boot/dts/mediatek/mt8173.dtsi      |  78 +-
 arch/arm64/boot/dts/mediatek/mt8183.dtsi      | 160 +++
 drivers/soc/mediatek/Kconfig                  |  13 +
 drivers/soc/mediatek/Makefile                 |   1 +
 drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-infracfg.c           |   5 -
 drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-pm-domains.c         | 952 ++++++++++++++++++
 include/dt-bindings/power/mt8183-power.h      |  26 +
 include/linux/soc/mediatek/infracfg.h         |  39 +
 9 files changed, 1433 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
 create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/mediatek,power-controller.yaml
 create mode 100644 drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-pm-domains.c
 create mode 100644 include/dt-bindings/power/mt8183-power.h

Comments

Weiyi Lu Sept. 25, 2020, 10:06 a.m. UTC | #1
On Thu, 2020-09-10 at 19:28 +0200, Enric Balletbo i Serra wrote:
> Dear all,
> 
> This is a new driver with the aim to deprecate the mtk-scpsys driver.
> The problem with that driver is that, in order to support more Mediatek
> SoCs you need to add some logic to handle properly the power-up
> sequence of newer Mediatek SoCs, doesn't handle parent-child power
> domains and need to hardcode all the clocks in the driver itself. The
> result is that the driver is getting bigger and bigger every time a
> new SoC needs to be supported.
> 

Hi Enric and Matthias,

First of all, thank you for the patch. But I'm worried the problem you
mentioned won't be solved even if we work on this new driver in the
future. My work on the MT8183 scpsys(now v17) is to implement the new
hardware logic. Here, I also see related patches, which means that these
new logics are necessary. Why can't we work on the original driver?
Meanwhile, I thought maybe we should separate the driver into general
control and platform data for each SoC, otherwise it'll keep getting
bigger and bigger if it need to be support new SoC.

And consider DVFSRC
(dynamic voltage and frequency scaling resource collector), should we
keep the original driver name "scpsys" instead of "pm-domains" because
it may provide more functions than power domains?

> All this information can be getted from a properly defined binding, so
> can be cleaner and smaller, hence, we implemented a new driver. For
> now, only MT8173 and MT8183 is supported but should be fairly easy to
> add support for new SoCs.
> 
> Best regards,
>   Enric
> 
> Enric Balletbo i Serra (4):
>   dt-bindings: power: Add bindings for the Mediatek SCPSYS power domains
>     controller
>   soc: mediatek: Add MediaTek SCPSYS power domains
>   arm64: dts: mediatek: Add mt8173 power domain controller
>   dt-bindings: power: Add MT8183 power domains
> 
> Matthias Brugger (8):
>   soc: mediatek: pm-domains: Add bus protection protocol
>   soc: mediatek: pm_domains: Make bus protection generic
>   soc: mediatek: pm-domains: Add SMI block as bus protection block
>   soc: mediatek: pm-domains: Add extra sram control
>   soc: mediatek: pm-domains: Add subsystem clocks
>   soc: mediatek: pm-domains: Allow bus protection to ignore clear ack
>   soc: mediatek: pm-domains: Add support for mt8183
>   arm64: dts: mediatek: Add mt8183 power domains controller
> 
>  .../power/mediatek,power-controller.yaml      | 173 ++++
>  arch/arm64/boot/dts/mediatek/mt8173.dtsi      |  78 +-
>  arch/arm64/boot/dts/mediatek/mt8183.dtsi      | 160 +++
>  drivers/soc/mediatek/Kconfig                  |  13 +
>  drivers/soc/mediatek/Makefile                 |   1 +
>  drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-infracfg.c           |   5 -
>  drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-pm-domains.c         | 952 ++++++++++++++++++
>  include/dt-bindings/power/mt8183-power.h      |  26 +
>  include/linux/soc/mediatek/infracfg.h         |  39 +
>  9 files changed, 1433 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
>  create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/mediatek,power-controller.yaml
>  create mode 100644 drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-pm-domains.c
>  create mode 100644 include/dt-bindings/power/mt8183-power.h
>
Matthias Brugger Sept. 25, 2020, 2:04 p.m. UTC | #2
On 25/09/2020 12:06, Weiyi Lu wrote:
> On Thu, 2020-09-10 at 19:28 +0200, Enric Balletbo i Serra wrote:
>> Dear all,
>>
>> This is a new driver with the aim to deprecate the mtk-scpsys driver.
>> The problem with that driver is that, in order to support more Mediatek
>> SoCs you need to add some logic to handle properly the power-up
>> sequence of newer Mediatek SoCs, doesn't handle parent-child power
>> domains and need to hardcode all the clocks in the driver itself. The
>> result is that the driver is getting bigger and bigger every time a
>> new SoC needs to be supported.
>>
> 
> Hi Enric and Matthias,
> 
> First of all, thank you for the patch. But I'm worried the problem you
> mentioned won't be solved even if we work on this new driver in the
> future. My work on the MT8183 scpsys(now v17) is to implement the new
> hardware logic. Here, I also see related patches, which means that these
> new logics are necessary. Why can't we work on the original driver?

Well the decision was to change the driver in a not compatible way to make 
device tree entries better. If we work on the old driver, we would need to find 
some creative ways to handle old bindings vs new bindings.

So I thought it would be better doing a fresh start implementing mt1873 support 
for reference and add mt8183 as new SoC. From what I have seen mt8192 and others 
fit the driver structure too.

> Meanwhile, I thought maybe we should separate the driver into general
> control and platform data for each SoC, otherwise it'll keep getting
> bigger and bigger if it need to be support new SoC.
> 

We could in a later series split the SoC depended data structures and put them 
in drivers/soc/mediatek/pm-domains-mt8183.h or something like this. Is that what 
you mean?

> And consider DVFSRC
> (dynamic voltage and frequency scaling resource collector), should we
> keep the original driver name "scpsys" instead of "pm-domains" because
> it may provide more functions than power domains?
> 

It's on my list to look deeper into this series. The thing with the new driver 
is, that the binding takes into account, that scpsys has several hardware block, 
which are represented as child nodes in DTS. The pm-domains is just one of these 
functionalities and I think DVFSRC should be a new driver with a child node of 
scpsys in DTS. Does this make sense?

Regards,
Matthias

>> All this information can be getted from a properly defined binding, so
>> can be cleaner and smaller, hence, we implemented a new driver. For
>> now, only MT8173 and MT8183 is supported but should be fairly easy to
>> add support for new SoCs.
>>
>> Best regards,
>>    Enric
>>
>> Enric Balletbo i Serra (4):
>>    dt-bindings: power: Add bindings for the Mediatek SCPSYS power domains
>>      controller
>>    soc: mediatek: Add MediaTek SCPSYS power domains
>>    arm64: dts: mediatek: Add mt8173 power domain controller
>>    dt-bindings: power: Add MT8183 power domains
>>
>> Matthias Brugger (8):
>>    soc: mediatek: pm-domains: Add bus protection protocol
>>    soc: mediatek: pm_domains: Make bus protection generic
>>    soc: mediatek: pm-domains: Add SMI block as bus protection block
>>    soc: mediatek: pm-domains: Add extra sram control
>>    soc: mediatek: pm-domains: Add subsystem clocks
>>    soc: mediatek: pm-domains: Allow bus protection to ignore clear ack
>>    soc: mediatek: pm-domains: Add support for mt8183
>>    arm64: dts: mediatek: Add mt8183 power domains controller
>>
>>   .../power/mediatek,power-controller.yaml      | 173 ++++
>>   arch/arm64/boot/dts/mediatek/mt8173.dtsi      |  78 +-
>>   arch/arm64/boot/dts/mediatek/mt8183.dtsi      | 160 +++
>>   drivers/soc/mediatek/Kconfig                  |  13 +
>>   drivers/soc/mediatek/Makefile                 |   1 +
>>   drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-infracfg.c           |   5 -
>>   drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-pm-domains.c         | 952 ++++++++++++++++++
>>   include/dt-bindings/power/mt8183-power.h      |  26 +
>>   include/linux/soc/mediatek/infracfg.h         |  39 +
>>   9 files changed, 1433 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
>>   create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/mediatek,power-controller.yaml
>>   create mode 100644 drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-pm-domains.c
>>   create mode 100644 include/dt-bindings/power/mt8183-power.h
>>
>
Weiyi Lu Oct. 6, 2020, 6:53 a.m. UTC | #3
On Fri, 2020-09-25 at 16:04 +0200, Matthias Brugger wrote:
> 
> On 25/09/2020 12:06, Weiyi Lu wrote:
> > On Thu, 2020-09-10 at 19:28 +0200, Enric Balletbo i Serra wrote:
> >> Dear all,
> >>
> >> This is a new driver with the aim to deprecate the mtk-scpsys driver.
> >> The problem with that driver is that, in order to support more Mediatek
> >> SoCs you need to add some logic to handle properly the power-up
> >> sequence of newer Mediatek SoCs, doesn't handle parent-child power
> >> domains and need to hardcode all the clocks in the driver itself. The
> >> result is that the driver is getting bigger and bigger every time a
> >> new SoC needs to be supported.
> >>
> > 
> > Hi Enric and Matthias,
> > 
> > First of all, thank you for the patch. But I'm worried the problem you
> > mentioned won't be solved even if we work on this new driver in the
> > future. My work on the MT8183 scpsys(now v17) is to implement the new
> > hardware logic. Here, I also see related patches, which means that these
> > new logics are necessary. Why can't we work on the original driver?
> 
> Well the decision was to change the driver in a not compatible way to make 
> device tree entries better. If we work on the old driver, we would need to find 
> some creative ways to handle old bindings vs new bindings.
> 
> So I thought it would be better doing a fresh start implementing mt1873 support 
> for reference and add mt8183 as new SoC. From what I have seen mt8192 and others 
> fit the driver structure too.
> 
> > Meanwhile, I thought maybe we should separate the driver into general
> > control and platform data for each SoC, otherwise it'll keep getting
> > bigger and bigger if it need to be support new SoC.
> > 
> 
> We could in a later series split the SoC depended data structures and put them 
> in drivers/soc/mediatek/pm-domains-mt8183.h or something like this. Is that what 
> you mean?
> 

Yes, that is what I want. And I guess it could avoid the collisions in
the different defines to the control registers and power status bits you
mentioned. Hope this will happen in this series.

> > And consider DVFSRC
> > (dynamic voltage and frequency scaling resource collector), should we
> > keep the original driver name "scpsys" instead of "pm-domains" because
> > it may provide more functions than power domains?
> > 
> 
> It's on my list to look deeper into this series. The thing with the new driver 
> is, that the binding takes into account, that scpsys has several hardware block, 
> which are represented as child nodes in DTS. The pm-domains is just one of these 
> functionalities and I think DVFSRC should be a new driver with a child node of 
> scpsys in DTS. Does this make sense?
> 
> Regards,
> Matthias
> 
> >> All this information can be getted from a properly defined binding, so
> >> can be cleaner and smaller, hence, we implemented a new driver. For
> >> now, only MT8173 and MT8183 is supported but should be fairly easy to
> >> add support for new SoCs.
> >>
> >> Best regards,
> >>    Enric
> >>
> >> Enric Balletbo i Serra (4):
> >>    dt-bindings: power: Add bindings for the Mediatek SCPSYS power domains
> >>      controller
> >>    soc: mediatek: Add MediaTek SCPSYS power domains
> >>    arm64: dts: mediatek: Add mt8173 power domain controller
> >>    dt-bindings: power: Add MT8183 power domains
> >>
> >> Matthias Brugger (8):
> >>    soc: mediatek: pm-domains: Add bus protection protocol
> >>    soc: mediatek: pm_domains: Make bus protection generic
> >>    soc: mediatek: pm-domains: Add SMI block as bus protection block
> >>    soc: mediatek: pm-domains: Add extra sram control
> >>    soc: mediatek: pm-domains: Add subsystem clocks
> >>    soc: mediatek: pm-domains: Allow bus protection to ignore clear ack
> >>    soc: mediatek: pm-domains: Add support for mt8183
> >>    arm64: dts: mediatek: Add mt8183 power domains controller
> >>
> >>   .../power/mediatek,power-controller.yaml      | 173 ++++
> >>   arch/arm64/boot/dts/mediatek/mt8173.dtsi      |  78 +-
> >>   arch/arm64/boot/dts/mediatek/mt8183.dtsi      | 160 +++
> >>   drivers/soc/mediatek/Kconfig                  |  13 +
> >>   drivers/soc/mediatek/Makefile                 |   1 +
> >>   drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-infracfg.c           |   5 -
> >>   drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-pm-domains.c         | 952 ++++++++++++++++++
> >>   include/dt-bindings/power/mt8183-power.h      |  26 +
> >>   include/linux/soc/mediatek/infracfg.h         |  39 +
> >>   9 files changed, 1433 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
> >>   create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/mediatek,power-controller.yaml
> >>   create mode 100644 drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-pm-domains.c
> >>   create mode 100644 include/dt-bindings/power/mt8183-power.h
> >>
> > 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Linux-mediatek mailing list
> Linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mediatek
Matthias Brugger Oct. 9, 2020, 12:50 p.m. UTC | #4
On 06/10/2020 08:53, Weiyi Lu wrote:
> On Fri, 2020-09-25 at 16:04 +0200, Matthias Brugger wrote:
>>
>> On 25/09/2020 12:06, Weiyi Lu wrote:
>>> On Thu, 2020-09-10 at 19:28 +0200, Enric Balletbo i Serra wrote:
>>>> Dear all,
>>>>
>>>> This is a new driver with the aim to deprecate the mtk-scpsys driver.
>>>> The problem with that driver is that, in order to support more Mediatek
>>>> SoCs you need to add some logic to handle properly the power-up
>>>> sequence of newer Mediatek SoCs, doesn't handle parent-child power
>>>> domains and need to hardcode all the clocks in the driver itself. The
>>>> result is that the driver is getting bigger and bigger every time a
>>>> new SoC needs to be supported.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Hi Enric and Matthias,
>>>
>>> First of all, thank you for the patch. But I'm worried the problem you
>>> mentioned won't be solved even if we work on this new driver in the
>>> future. My work on the MT8183 scpsys(now v17) is to implement the new
>>> hardware logic. Here, I also see related patches, which means that these
>>> new logics are necessary. Why can't we work on the original driver?
>>
>> Well the decision was to change the driver in a not compatible way to make
>> device tree entries better. If we work on the old driver, we would need to find
>> some creative ways to handle old bindings vs new bindings.
>>
>> So I thought it would be better doing a fresh start implementing mt1873 support
>> for reference and add mt8183 as new SoC. From what I have seen mt8192 and others
>> fit the driver structure too.
>>
>>> Meanwhile, I thought maybe we should separate the driver into general
>>> control and platform data for each SoC, otherwise it'll keep getting
>>> bigger and bigger if it need to be support new SoC.
>>>
>>
>> We could in a later series split the SoC depended data structures and put them
>> in drivers/soc/mediatek/pm-domains-mt8183.h or something like this. Is that what
>> you mean?
>>
> 
> Yes, that is what I want. And I guess it could avoid the collisions in
> the different defines to the control registers and power status bits you
> mentioned. Hope this will happen in this series.
> 

Sounds good to me. Enric could you move the soc specific data to separate 
include files?

Regards,
Matthias
Enric Balletbo i Serra Oct. 9, 2020, 1:57 p.m. UTC | #5
Hi,

On 9/10/20 14:50, Matthias Brugger wrote:
> 
> 
> On 06/10/2020 08:53, Weiyi Lu wrote:
>> On Fri, 2020-09-25 at 16:04 +0200, Matthias Brugger wrote:
>>>
>>> On 25/09/2020 12:06, Weiyi Lu wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 2020-09-10 at 19:28 +0200, Enric Balletbo i Serra wrote:
>>>>> Dear all,
>>>>>
>>>>> This is a new driver with the aim to deprecate the mtk-scpsys driver.
>>>>> The problem with that driver is that, in order to support more Mediatek
>>>>> SoCs you need to add some logic to handle properly the power-up
>>>>> sequence of newer Mediatek SoCs, doesn't handle parent-child power
>>>>> domains and need to hardcode all the clocks in the driver itself. The
>>>>> result is that the driver is getting bigger and bigger every time a
>>>>> new SoC needs to be supported.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Hi Enric and Matthias,
>>>>
>>>> First of all, thank you for the patch. But I'm worried the problem you
>>>> mentioned won't be solved even if we work on this new driver in the
>>>> future. My work on the MT8183 scpsys(now v17) is to implement the new
>>>> hardware logic. Here, I also see related patches, which means that these
>>>> new logics are necessary. Why can't we work on the original driver?
>>>
>>> Well the decision was to change the driver in a not compatible way to make
>>> device tree entries better. If we work on the old driver, we would need to find
>>> some creative ways to handle old bindings vs new bindings.
>>>
>>> So I thought it would be better doing a fresh start implementing mt1873 support
>>> for reference and add mt8183 as new SoC. From what I have seen mt8192 and others
>>> fit the driver structure too.
>>>
>>>> Meanwhile, I thought maybe we should separate the driver into general
>>>> control and platform data for each SoC, otherwise it'll keep getting
>>>> bigger and bigger if it need to be support new SoC.
>>>>
>>>
>>> We could in a later series split the SoC depended data structures and put them
>>> in drivers/soc/mediatek/pm-domains-mt8183.h or something like this. Is that what
>>> you mean?
>>>
>>
>> Yes, that is what I want. And I guess it could avoid the collisions in
>> the different defines to the control registers and power status bits you
>> mentioned. Hope this will happen in this series.
>>
> 
> Sounds good to me. Enric could you move the soc specific data to separate
> include files?
> 

Sure, I'll do this in v4.

Thanks,
 Enric

> Regards,
> Matthias
>