Re: [PATCH 1/3] clocksource/drivers/timer-ti-dm: Fix posted mode status check order

[Grygorii Strashko]

On 04/03/2021 09:21, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> When the timer is configured in posted mode, we need to check the write-
> posted status register (TWPS) before writing to the register.
>
> We now check TWPS after the write starting with commit 52762fbd1c47
> ("clocksource/drivers/timer-ti-dm: Add clockevent and clocksource
> support").
>
> For example, in the TRM for am571x the following is documented in chapter
> "22.2.4.13.1.1 Write Posting Synchronization Mode":
>
> "For each register, a status bit is provided in the timer write-posted
>   status (TWPS) register. In this mode, it is mandatory that software check
>   this status bit before any write access. If a write is attempted to a
>   register with a previous access pending, the previous access is discarded
>   without notice."
>
> The regression happened when I updated the code to use standard read/write
> accessors for the driver instead of using __omap_dm_timer_load_start().
> We have__omap_dm_timer_load_start() check the TWPS status correctly using
> __omap_dm_timer_write().
>
> Fixes: 52762fbd1c47 ("clocksource/drivers/timer-ti-dm: Add clockevent and clocksource support")
> Signed-off-by: Tony Lindgren <tony@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>   drivers/clocksource/timer-ti-dm-systimer.c | 12 ++++++------
>   1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/clocksource/timer-ti-dm-systimer.c b/drivers/clocksource/timer-ti-dm-systimer.c
> --- a/drivers/clocksource/timer-ti-dm-systimer.c
> +++ b/drivers/clocksource/timer-ti-dm-systimer.c
> @@ -449,13 +449,13 @@ static int dmtimer_set_next_event(unsigned long cycles,
>   	struct dmtimer_systimer *t = &clkevt->t;
>   	void __iomem *pend = t->base + t->pend;
>   
> -	writel_relaxed(0xffffffff - cycles, t->base + t->counter);
>   	while (readl_relaxed(pend) & WP_TCRR)
>   		cpu_relax();
> +	writel_relaxed(0xffffffff - cycles, t->base + t->counter);
>   
> -	writel_relaxed(OMAP_TIMER_CTRL_ST, t->base + t->ctrl);
>   	while (readl_relaxed(pend) & WP_TCLR)
>   		cpu_relax();
> +	writel_relaxed(OMAP_TIMER_CTRL_ST, t->base + t->ctrl);

It seems static [and inline] helper here could be better solution. no?

>   
>   	return 0;
>   }
> @@ -490,18 +490,18 @@ static int dmtimer_set_periodic(struct clock_event_device *evt)
>   	dmtimer_clockevent_shutdown(evt);
>   
>   	/* Looks like we need to first set the load value separately */
> -	writel_relaxed(clkevt->period, t->base + t->load);
>   	while (readl_relaxed(pend) & WP_TLDR)
>   		cpu_relax();
> +	writel_relaxed(clkevt->period, t->base + t->load);
>   
> -	writel_relaxed(clkevt->period, t->base + t->counter);
>   	while (readl_relaxed(pend) & WP_TCRR)
>   		cpu_relax();
> +	writel_relaxed(clkevt->period, t->base + t->counter);
>   
> -	writel_relaxed(OMAP_TIMER_CTRL_AR | OMAP_TIMER_CTRL_ST,
> -		       t->base + t->ctrl);
>   	while (readl_relaxed(pend) & WP_TCLR)
>   		cpu_relax();
> +	writel_relaxed(OMAP_TIMER_CTRL_AR | OMAP_TIMER_CTRL_ST,
> +		       t->base + t->ctrl);
>   
>   	return 0;
>   }

--
Best regards,
grygorii