On Tue, Sep 07, 2021 at 09:41:23PM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote: > On 02.09.21 08:36, Jan Kiszka wrote: > > On 28.07.21 11:10, Jan Kiszka wrote: > >> On 30.01.20 09:05, Roger Quadros wrote: > >>> NB0 is bridge to SRAM and NB1 is bridge to DDR. > >>> > >>> To ensure that SRAM transfers are not stalled due to > >>> delays during DDR refreshes, SRAM traffic should be higher > >>> priority (threadmap=2) than DDR traffic (threadmap=0). > >>> > >>> This patch does just that. > >>> > >>> This is required to fix ICSSG TX lock-ups due to delays in > >>> MSMC transfers due to incorrect Northbridge configuration. > >>> > >>> Signed-off-by: Roger Quadros <rog...@ti.com> > >>> Acked-by: Andrew F. Davis <a...@ti.com> > >>> Acked-by: Tomi Valkeinen <tomi.valkei...@ti.com> > >>> Acked-by: Benoit Parrot <bpar...@ti.com> > >>> --- > >>> arch/arm/mach-k3/am6_init.c | 14 ++++++++++++++ > >>> arch/arm/mach-k3/include/mach/am6_hardware.h | 7 +++++++ > >>> 2 files changed, 21 insertions(+) > >>> > >>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-k3/am6_init.c b/arch/arm/mach-k3/am6_init.c > >>> index 8d107b870b..9379b95bdb 100644 > >>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-k3/am6_init.c > >>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-k3/am6_init.c > >>> @@ -86,6 +86,18 @@ static void store_boot_index_from_rom(void) > >>> bootindex = *(u32 *)(CONFIG_SYS_K3_BOOT_PARAM_TABLE_INDEX); > >>> } > >>> > >>> +static void setup_am654_navss_northbridge(void) > >>> +{ > >>> + /* > >>> + * NB0 is bridge to SRAM and NB1 is bridge to DDR. > >>> + * To ensure that SRAM transfers are not stalled due to > >>> + * delays during DDR refreshes, SRAM traffic should be higher > >>> + * priority (threadmap=2) than DDR traffic (threadmap=0). > >>> + */ > >>> + writel(0x2, NAVSS0_NBSS_NB0_CFG_BASE + NAVSS_NBSS_THREADMAP); > >>> + writel(0x0, NAVSS0_NBSS_NB1_CFG_BASE + NAVSS_NBSS_THREADMAP); > >>> +} > >>> + > >>> void board_init_f(ulong dummy) > >>> { > >>> #if defined(CONFIG_K3_LOAD_SYSFW) || defined(CONFIG_K3_AM654_DDRSS) > >>> @@ -101,6 +113,8 @@ void board_init_f(ulong dummy) > >>> /* Make all control module registers accessible */ > >>> ctrl_mmr_unlock(); > >>> > >>> + setup_am654_navss_northbridge(); > >>> + > >>> #ifdef CONFIG_CPU_V7R > >>> disable_linefill_optimization(); > >>> setup_k3_mpu_regions(); > >>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-k3/include/mach/am6_hardware.h > >>> b/arch/arm/mach-k3/include/mach/am6_hardware.h > >>> index 6df7631545..45a5b31c52 100644 > >>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-k3/include/mach/am6_hardware.h > >>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-k3/include/mach/am6_hardware.h > >>> @@ -47,4 +47,11 @@ > >>> /* MCU SCRATCHPAD usage */ > >>> #define TI_SRAM_SCRATCH_BOARD_EEPROM_START > >>> CONFIG_SYS_K3_MCU_SCRATCHPAD_BASE > >>> > >>> +/* NAVSS Northbridge config */ > >>> +#define NAVSS0_NBSS_NB0_CFG_BASE 0x03802000 > >>> +#define NAVSS0_NBSS_NB1_CFG_BASE 0x03803000 > >>> + > >>> +#define NAVSS_NBSS_PID 0x0 > >>> +#define NAVSS_NBSS_THREADMAP 0x10 > >>> + > >>> #endif /* __ASM_ARCH_AM6_HARDWARE_H */ > >>> > >> > >> This was never merged, not even commented on (only apparently rejected > >> in patchwork) - but it is crucial as we now found out: > >> > >> prueth will quickly stall when these priorities are not applied, at > >> least with SR1.0-based AM65x designs. And you probably know what else > >> could go wrong. Please clarify and merge, possibly reducing the scope to > >> SR1.0 if you can confirm that SR2.0 cannot be affected by design (I can > >> only say this based on few practical experiments here). > >> > >> If it was good for several TI SDK releases by now, at least something > >> similar should be good for upstream as well, I believe. > >> > > > > Ping. We need at least some confirmation on what is actually needed. > > Then, if you do not like to add it to the generic path, it would be easy > > for us to carry it in the IOT2050 board init only - with the appropriate > > condition check. > > Did some more experiments on SR2 silicon, and while I'm not seeing > stalls without this patch there, iperf tests with prueth show high retry > rates and, thus, about 10% worse throughput. So it seems to be required > for newer silicon as well.
At this point, I'd really appreciate it if someone from within TI can chime in here as I expect someone must suspect something here, thanks! -- Tom
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature