| Message ID | 20230511173211.9127-1-sumitg@nvidia.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| Headers | show |
| Series | Tegra234 Memory interconnect support | expand |
On 11/05/2023 19:32, Sumit Gupta wrote: > Hi All, > > Have incorporated the suggestions in v7. Only changed 'patch 1' in v7 > to fix possible race when setting 'mc->bpmp' as pointed by Krzysztof. > Requesting to merge the patch series. > Can I apply it since you request it? I asked you long time ago to clearly state dependencies or merging limitations. It's v8 and cover letter still does not state it. Neither the patches do. Best regards, Krzysztof
On 14/05/23 16:11, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > External email: Use caution opening links or attachments > > > On 11/05/2023 19:32, Sumit Gupta wrote: >> Hi All, >> >> Have incorporated the suggestions in v7. Only changed 'patch 1' in v7 >> to fix possible race when setting 'mc->bpmp' as pointed by Krzysztof. >> Requesting to merge the patch series. >> > > Can I apply it since you request it? Yes, the patch series can be applied in current sequence except that the 'patch 4' comes before 'patch 3' (just realized). Would you please swap 'patch 4' with 'patch 3' while applying (or) you want me to re-send? I asked you long time ago to > clearly state dependencies or merging limitations. It's v8 and cover > letter still does not state it. Neither the patches do. > I added the dependency list in previous versions [7] but removed thinking the patch series will now be applied altogether. [7] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20230424131337.20151-1-sumitg@nvidia.com/ Thank you, Sumit Gupta
On Sun, May 14, 2023 at 12:41:45PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 11/05/2023 19:32, Sumit Gupta wrote: > > Hi All, > > > > Have incorporated the suggestions in v7. Only changed 'patch 1' in v7 > > to fix possible race when setting 'mc->bpmp' as pointed by Krzysztof. > > Requesting to merge the patch series. > > > > Can I apply it since you request it? I asked you long time ago to > clearly state dependencies or merging limitations. It's v8 and cover > letter still does not state it. Neither the patches do. I thought we had discussed and agreed to merge this through the Tegra tree, which is why you had provided Acked-bys on all the patches. I was waiting for a final Acked-by on patch 1, since that was the only one still being revised. If you prefer to merge this, that works for me too. In that case, the series: Acked-by: Thierry Reding <treding@nvidia.com> Although it might be good if I pick up at least patch 8, just as a precautionary measure to avoid potential conflicts going forward. As I understand, it should be safe to apply that separately. Thierry
On 15/05/2023 18:18, Thierry Reding wrote: > On Sun, May 14, 2023 at 12:41:45PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >> On 11/05/2023 19:32, Sumit Gupta wrote: >>> Hi All, >>> >>> Have incorporated the suggestions in v7. Only changed 'patch 1' in v7 >>> to fix possible race when setting 'mc->bpmp' as pointed by Krzysztof. >>> Requesting to merge the patch series. >>> >> >> Can I apply it since you request it? I asked you long time ago to >> clearly state dependencies or merging limitations. It's v8 and cover >> letter still does not state it. Neither the patches do. > > I thought we had discussed and agreed to merge this through the Tegra > tree, which is why you had provided Acked-bys on all the patches. I was > waiting for a final Acked-by on patch 1, since that was the only one > still being revised. > > If you prefer to merge this, that works for me too. In that case, the > series: > > Acked-by: Thierry Reding <treding@nvidia.com> I have short memory and that's why we have cover letter. Solves all the problems. Let me ack it now. Best regards, Krzysztof
Hi All, Have incorporated the suggestions in v7. Only changed 'patch 1' in v7 to fix possible race when setting 'mc->bpmp' as pointed by Krzysztof. Requesting to merge the patch series. Thank you, Sumit Gupta ============ This patch series adds memory interconnect support for Tegra234 SoC. It is used to dynamically scale DRAM Frequency as per the bandwidth requests from different Memory Controller (MC) clients. MC Clients use ICC Framework's icc_set_bw() api to dynamically request for the DRAM bandwidth (BW). As per path, the request will be routed from MC to the EMC driver. MC driver passes the request info like the Client ID, type, and frequency request info to the BPMP-FW which will set the final DRAM freq considering all exisiting requests. MC and EMC are the ICC providers. Nodes in path for a request will be: Client[1-n] -> MC -> EMC -> EMEM/DRAM The patch series also adds interconnect support in below clients: 1) CPUFREQ driver for scaling bandwidth with CPU frequency. For that, add per cluster OPP table which will be used in the CPUFREQ driver by requesting the minimum BW respective to the given CPU frequency in the OPP table of it's cluster. 2) PCIE driver to request BW required for different modes. --- v7[7] -> v8: - fixed possible race and compiler re-ordering when setting 'mc->bpmp'. v6[6] -> v7: - removed 'Patch 6' from v6 as it has been applied in next by 'Viresh'. - changed commit message of PCI patches as suggested by 'Lorenzo'. - added ACK from 'Lorenzo' in both PCI patches. v5[5] -> v6: - split PCI patch into two 'patch 7 & 8' as suggested by 'Lorenzo'. - added more info into the commit description of PCI patches. v4[4] -> v5: - dropped 'patch 1 & 2' from v4 which added "nvidia,bpmp" in MC node. - save BPMP ref from EMC node into 'mc->bpmp' and use it in MC driver. - added check for array bounds violation in pci suggested by Bjorn. - moved DT patch having OPP table to the last 'Patch 8'. - did multiple small changes and cleanup suggested by Krzysztof in v4. v3[3] -> v4: - dropped 'patch 1' from v3 which returns 'struct tegra_bpmp *'. - added 'patch 1 & 2' to get bpmp ref using 'nvidia,bpmp' property. - dropped 'patch 10 & 11' from v3 and added those changes in 'patch 3'. - added static to prototype of 'tegra_cpufreq_init_cpufreq_table()' to fix the warning reported by 'kernel test robot'. v2[2] -> v3: - in 'patch 7', set 'icc_dram_bw_scaling' to false if set_opp call failed to avoid flooding of uart with 'Failed to set bw' messages. - added 'patch 10' to handle if the bpmp-fw is old and not support bwmgr mrq. - added 'patch 11' to fix interconnect registration in tegra186-emc. ref patch link in linux next: [https://lore.kernel.org/all/20230306075651.2449-21-johan+linaro@kernel.org/] v1[1] -> v2: - moved BW setting to tegra234_mc_icc_set() from EMC driver. - moved sw clients to the 'tegra_mc_clients' table. - point 'node->data' to the entry within 'tegra_mc_clients'. - removed 'struct tegra_icc_node' and get client info using 'node->data'. - changed error handling in and around tegra_emc_interconnect_init(). - moved 'tegra-icc.h' from 'include/soc/tegra' to 'include/linux'. - added interconnect support to PCIE driver in 'Patch 9'. - merged 'Patch 9 & 10' from [1] to get num_channels and use. - merged 'Patch 2 & 3' from [1] to add ISO and NISO clients. - added 'Acked-by' of Krzysztof from 'Patch 05/10' of [1]. - Removed 'Patch 7' from [1] as that is merged now. Sumit Gupta (8): memory: tegra: add interconnect support for DRAM scaling in Tegra234 memory: tegra: add mc clients for Tegra234 memory: tegra: add software mc clients in Tegra234 dt-bindings: tegra: add icc ids for dummy MC clients memory: tegra: make cpu cluster bw request a multiple of mc channels PCI: tegra194: Fix possible array out of bounds access PCI: tegra194: Add interconnect support in Tegra234 arm64: tegra: Add cpu OPP tables and interconnects property arch/arm64/boot/dts/nvidia/tegra234.dtsi | 276 ++++++++++ drivers/memory/tegra/mc.c | 24 + drivers/memory/tegra/mc.h | 1 + drivers/memory/tegra/tegra186-emc.c | 133 +++++ drivers/memory/tegra/tegra234.c | 595 ++++++++++++++++++++- drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-tegra194.c | 44 +- include/dt-bindings/memory/tegra234-mc.h | 5 + include/linux/tegra-icc.h | 65 +++ include/soc/tegra/mc.h | 8 + 9 files changed, 1142 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) create mode 100644 include/linux/tegra-icc.h [1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20221220160240.27494-1-sumitg@nvidia.com/ [2] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20230220140559.28289-1-sumitg@nvidia.com/ [3] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20230320182441.11904-1-sumitg@nvidia.com/ [4] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20230327161426.32639-1-sumitg@nvidia.com/ [5] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20230330133354.714-1-sumitg@nvidia.com/ [6] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20230411110002.19824-1-sumitg@nvidia.com/ [7] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20230424131337.20151-1-sumitg@nvidia.com/