[v5,2/5] ARM: imx6: gpc: Add PU power domain for GPU/VPU

When generic pm domain support is enabled, the PGC can be used
to completely gate power to the PU power domain containing GPU3D,
GPU2D, and VPU cores.
This code triggers the PGC powerdown sequence to disable the GPU/VPU
isolation cells and gate power and then disables the PU regulator.
To reenable, the reverse powerup sequence is triggered after the PU
regulator is enabled again.
The GPU and VPU devices in the PU power domain temporarily need
to be clocked during powerup, so that the reset machinery can work.

Signed-off-by: Philipp Zabel <p.zabel@pengutronix.de>
---
Changes since v4:
 - Add pu_domain struct to contain regulator and clocks
 - Obtain clocks from device tree instead of from bus notifier
 - Add compatible value for imx6sl (untested)
---
 arch/arm/mach-imx/Kconfig |   2 +
 arch/arm/mach-imx/gpc.c   | 182 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 2 files changed, 184 insertions(+)

On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 05:03:44PM +0100, Philipp Zabel wrote:
> When generic pm domain support is enabled, the PGC can be used
> to completely gate power to the PU power domain containing GPU3D,
> GPU2D, and VPU cores.
> This code triggers the PGC powerdown sequence to disable the GPU/VPU
> isolation cells and gate power and then disables the PU regulator.
> To reenable, the reverse powerup sequence is triggered after the PU
> regulator is enabled again.
> The GPU and VPU devices in the PU power domain temporarily need
> to be clocked during powerup, so that the reset machinery can work.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Philipp Zabel <p.zabel@pengutronix.de>
> ---
> Changes since v4:
>  - Add pu_domain struct to contain regulator and clocks
>  - Obtain clocks from device tree instead of from bus notifier
>  - Add compatible value for imx6sl (untested)
> ---
>  arch/arm/mach-imx/Kconfig |   2 +
>  arch/arm/mach-imx/gpc.c   | 182 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  2 files changed, 184 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-imx/Kconfig b/arch/arm/mach-imx/Kconfig
> index 33567aa..3c58f2e 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/mach-imx/Kconfig
> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-imx/Kconfig
> @@ -808,6 +808,7 @@ config SOC_IMX6Q
>  	select PL310_ERRATA_727915 if CACHE_PL310
>  	select PL310_ERRATA_769419 if CACHE_PL310
>  	select PM_OPP if PM
> +	select PM_GENERIC_DOMAINS if PM

Would it make more sense to have HAVE_IMX_GPC select it instead?

>  
>  	help
>  	  This enables support for Freescale i.MX6 Quad processor.
> @@ -827,6 +828,7 @@ config SOC_IMX6SL
>  	select PL310_ERRATA_588369 if CACHE_PL310
>  	select PL310_ERRATA_727915 if CACHE_PL310
>  	select PL310_ERRATA_769419 if CACHE_PL310
> +	select PM_GENERIC_DOMAINS if PM
>  
>  	help
>  	  This enables support for Freescale i.MX6 SoloLite processor.
> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-imx/gpc.c b/arch/arm/mach-imx/gpc.c
> index 586e017..a0f587e 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/mach-imx/gpc.c
> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-imx/gpc.c
> @@ -10,19 +10,40 @@
>   * http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/gpl.html
>   */
>  
> +#include <linux/clk.h>
> +#include <linux/delay.h>
>  #include <linux/io.h>
>  #include <linux/irq.h>
>  #include <linux/of.h>
>  #include <linux/of_address.h>
>  #include <linux/of_irq.h>
> +#include <linux/platform_device.h>
> +#include <linux/pm_clock.h>

Is this header still needed?

> +#include <linux/pm_domain.h>
> +#include <linux/regulator/consumer.h>
>  #include <linux/irqchip/arm-gic.h>
>  #include "common.h"
> +#include "hardware.h"
>  
> +#define GPC_CNTR		0x000
>  #define GPC_IMR1		0x008
> +#define GPC_PGC_GPU_PDN		0x260
> +#define GPC_PGC_GPU_PUPSCR	0x264
> +#define GPC_PGC_GPU_PDNSCR	0x268
>  #define GPC_PGC_CPU_PDN		0x2a0
>  
>  #define IMR_NUM			4
>  
> +#define GPU_VPU_PUP_REQ		BIT(1)
> +#define GPU_VPU_PDN_REQ		BIT(0)
> +
> +struct pu_domain {
> +	struct generic_pm_domain base;
> +	struct regulator *reg;
> +	struct clk *clk[6];

Define a macro for this number?

> +	int num_clks;
> +};
> +
>  static void __iomem *gpc_base;
>  static u32 gpc_wake_irqs[IMR_NUM];
>  static u32 gpc_saved_imrs[IMR_NUM];
> @@ -138,3 +159,164 @@ void __init imx_gpc_init(void)
>  	gic_arch_extn.irq_unmask = imx_gpc_irq_unmask;
>  	gic_arch_extn.irq_set_wake = imx_gpc_irq_set_wake;
>  }
> +
> +#ifdef CONFIG_PM
> +
> +static int imx6q_pm_pu_power_off(struct generic_pm_domain *genpd)
> +{
> +	struct pu_domain *pu = container_of(genpd, struct pu_domain, base);
> +	int iso, iso2sw;
> +	u32 val;
> +
> +	/* Read ISO and ISO2SW power down delays */
> +	val = readl_relaxed(gpc_base + GPC_PGC_GPU_PDNSCR);
> +	iso = val & 0x3f;
> +	iso2sw = (val >> 8) & 0x3f;
> +
> +	/* Gate off PU domain when GPU/VPU when powered down */
> +	writel_relaxed(0x1, gpc_base + GPC_PGC_GPU_PDN);
> +
> +	/* Request GPC to power down GPU/VPU */
> +	val = readl_relaxed(gpc_base + GPC_CNTR);
> +	val |= GPU_VPU_PDN_REQ;
> +	writel_relaxed(val, gpc_base + GPC_CNTR);
> +
> +	/* Wait ISO + ISO2SW IPG clock cycles */
> +	ndelay((iso + iso2sw) * 1000 / 66);
> +
> +	regulator_disable(pu->reg);
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int imx6q_pm_pu_power_on(struct generic_pm_domain *genpd)
> +{
> +	struct pu_domain *pu = container_of(genpd, struct pu_domain, base);
> +	int i, ret, sw, sw2iso;
> +	u32 val;
> +
> +	ret = regulator_enable(pu->reg);
> +	if (ret) {
> +		pr_err("%s: failed to enable regulator: %d\n", __func__, ret);
> +		return ret;
> +	}
> +
> +	/* Enable reset clocks for all devices in the PU domain */
> +	for (i = 0; i < pu->num_clks; i++)
> +		clk_prepare_enable(pu->clk[i]);
> +
> +	/* Gate off PU domain when GPU/VPU when powered down */
> +	writel_relaxed(0x1, gpc_base + GPC_PGC_GPU_PDN);
> +
> +	/* Read ISO and ISO2SW power down delays */
> +	val = readl_relaxed(gpc_base + GPC_PGC_GPU_PUPSCR);
> +	sw = val & 0x3f;
> +	sw2iso = (val >> 8) & 0x3f;
> +
> +	/* Request GPC to power up GPU/VPU */
> +	val = readl_relaxed(gpc_base + GPC_CNTR);
> +	val |= GPU_VPU_PUP_REQ;
> +	writel_relaxed(val, gpc_base + GPC_CNTR);
> +
> +	/* Wait ISO + ISO2SW IPG clock cycles */
> +	ndelay((sw + sw2iso) * 1000 / 66);
> +
> +	/* Disable reset clocks for all devices in the PU domain */
> +	for (i = 0; i < pu->num_clks; i++)
> +		clk_disable_unprepare(pu->clk[i]);
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static struct generic_pm_domain imx6q_arm_domain = {
> +	.name = "ARM",
> +};
> +
> +static struct pu_domain imx6q_pu_domain = {
> +	.base = {
> +		.name = "PU",
> +		.power_off = imx6q_pm_pu_power_off,
> +		.power_on = imx6q_pm_pu_power_on,
> +		.power_off_latency_ns = 25000,
> +		.power_on_latency_ns = 2000000,
> +	},
> +};
> +
> +static struct generic_pm_domain imx6sl_display_domain = {
> +	.name = "DISPLAY",
> +};
> +
> +static struct generic_pm_domain *imx_gpc_domains[] = {
> +	&imx6q_arm_domain,
> +	&imx6q_pu_domain.base,
> +	&imx6sl_display_domain,
> +};
> +
> +static struct genpd_onecell_data imx_gpc_onecell_data = {
> +	.domains = imx_gpc_domains,
> +	.domain_num = ARRAY_SIZE(imx_gpc_domains),
> +};
> +
> +#endif /* CONFIG_PM */
> +
> +static int imx_gpc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> +{
> +	struct regulator *pu_reg;
> +	struct clk *clk;
> +	bool is_off;
> +	int ret, i;
> +
> +	pu_reg = devm_regulator_get(&pdev->dev, "pu");
> +	if (IS_ERR(pu_reg)) {
> +		ret = PTR_ERR(pu_reg);
> +		dev_err(&pdev->dev, "failed to get pu regulator: %d\n", ret);
> +		return ret;
> +	}
> +
> +	/* The regulator is initially enabled */
> +	ret = regulator_enable(pu_reg);
> +	if (ret < 0) {
> +		dev_err(&pdev->dev, "failed to enable pu regulator: %d\n", ret);
> +		return ret;
> +	}
> +	imx6q_pu_domain.base.of_node = pdev->dev.of_node;

How does this work with !CONFIG_PM build?

Shawn

> +	imx6q_pu_domain.reg = pu_reg;
> +
> +	for (i = 0; ; i++) {
> +		clk = of_clk_get(pdev->dev.of_node, i);
> +		if (IS_ERR(clk))
> +			break;
> +		imx6q_pu_domain.clk[i] = clk;
> +	}
> +	imx6q_pu_domain.num_clks = i;
> +
> +	is_off = IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PM_RUNTIME);
> +	if (is_off)
> +		imx6q_pm_pu_power_off(&imx6q_pu_domain.base);
> +
> +	pm_genpd_init(&imx6q_pu_domain.base, NULL, is_off);
> +	of_genpd_add_provider(pdev->dev.of_node, of_genpd_xlate_onecell,
> +			      &imx_gpc_onecell_data);
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static struct of_device_id imx_gpc_dt_ids[] = {
> +	{ .compatible = "fsl,imx6q-gpc" },
> +	{ .compatible = "fsl,imx6sl-gpc" },
> +	{ }
> +};
> +
> +static struct platform_driver imx_gpc_driver = {
> +	.driver = {
> +		.name = "imx-gpc",
> +		.owner = THIS_MODULE,
> +		.of_match_table = imx_gpc_dt_ids,
> +	},
> +	.probe = imx_gpc_probe,
> +};
> +
> +static int __init imx_pgc_init(void)
> +{
> +	return platform_driver_register(&imx_gpc_driver);
> +}
> +subsys_initcall(imx_pgc_init);
> -- 
> 1.8.5.3
>

Hi Shawn,

thank you for the comments.

Am Mittwoch, den 05.03.2014, 14:56 +0800 schrieb Shawn Guo:
> > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-imx/Kconfig b/arch/arm/mach-imx/Kconfig
> > index 33567aa..3c58f2e 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm/mach-imx/Kconfig
> > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-imx/Kconfig
> > @@ -808,6 +808,7 @@ config SOC_IMX6Q
> >  	select PL310_ERRATA_727915 if CACHE_PL310
> >  	select PL310_ERRATA_769419 if CACHE_PL310
> >  	select PM_OPP if PM
> > +	select PM_GENERIC_DOMAINS if PM
> 
> Would it make more sense to have HAVE_IMX_GPC select it instead?

Yes, I'll change that.

> > +#include <linux/pm_clock.h>
> 
> Is this header still needed?

No, will remove.

[...]
> > +struct pu_domain {
> > +	struct generic_pm_domain base;
> > +	struct regulator *reg;
> > +	struct clk *clk[6];
> 
> Define a macro for this number?

#define GPC_CLK_MAX   6

[...]
> > +static int imx_gpc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > +{
> > +	struct regulator *pu_reg;
> > +	struct clk *clk;
> > +	bool is_off;
> > +	int ret, i;
> > +
> > +	pu_reg = devm_regulator_get(&pdev->dev, "pu");
> > +	if (IS_ERR(pu_reg)) {
> > +		ret = PTR_ERR(pu_reg);
> > +		dev_err(&pdev->dev, "failed to get pu regulator: %d\n", ret);
> > +		return ret;
> > +	}
> > +
> > +	/* The regulator is initially enabled */
> > +	ret = regulator_enable(pu_reg);
> > +	if (ret < 0) {
> > +		dev_err(&pdev->dev, "failed to enable pu regulator: %d\n", ret);
> > +		return ret;
> > +	}
> > +	imx6q_pu_domain.base.of_node = pdev->dev.of_node;
> 
> How does this work with !CONFIG_PM build?

Since I removed the regulator-always-on property from the PU regulator
in the device tree, if CONFIG_PM is disabled, we have to request and
enable pu_reg here. Otherwise the regulator framework will helpfully
turn it off (imx6q-cpufreq never enables pu_reg).
With the PU regulator disabled, the system would hang as soon as the
CODA VPU or one of the Vivante GPU cores is accessed if !CONFIG_PM.

> > +	imx6q_pu_domain.reg = pu_reg;
> > +
> > +	for (i = 0; ; i++) {
> > +		clk = of_clk_get(pdev->dev.of_node, i);
> > +		if (IS_ERR(clk))
> > +			break;

Also, I should probably add
+		if (i >= GPC_CLK_MAX) {
+			dev_err(&pdev->dev, "more than %d clocks\n",
+				GPC_CLK_MAX);
+			return -EINVAL;
+		}
here.

> > +		imx6q_pu_domain.clk[i] = clk;
> > +	}
> > +	imx6q_pu_domain.num_clks = i;
[...]

regards
Philipp

On Wed, Mar 05, 2014 at 11:05:24AM +0100, Philipp Zabel wrote:
> > > +static int imx_gpc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > > +{
> > > +	struct regulator *pu_reg;
> > > +	struct clk *clk;
> > > +	bool is_off;
> > > +	int ret, i;
> > > +
> > > +	pu_reg = devm_regulator_get(&pdev->dev, "pu");
> > > +	if (IS_ERR(pu_reg)) {
> > > +		ret = PTR_ERR(pu_reg);
> > > +		dev_err(&pdev->dev, "failed to get pu regulator: %d\n", ret);
> > > +		return ret;
> > > +	}
> > > +
> > > +	/* The regulator is initially enabled */
> > > +	ret = regulator_enable(pu_reg);
> > > +	if (ret < 0) {
> > > +		dev_err(&pdev->dev, "failed to enable pu regulator: %d\n", ret);
> > > +		return ret;
> > > +	}
> > > +	imx6q_pu_domain.base.of_node = pdev->dev.of_node;
> > 
> > How does this work with !CONFIG_PM build?
> 
> Since I removed the regulator-always-on property from the PU regulator
> in the device tree, if CONFIG_PM is disabled, we have to request and
> enable pu_reg here. Otherwise the regulator framework will helpfully
> turn it off (imx6q-cpufreq never enables pu_reg).
> With the PU regulator disabled, the system would hang as soon as the
> CODA VPU or one of the Vivante GPU cores is accessed if !CONFIG_PM.

Sorry, I should have been more specific.  My question is how stuff like
imx6q_pu_domain are available for !CONFIG_PM build, since they are only
defined in #ifdef CONFIG_PM right above imx_gpc_probe().

Shawn

Am Mittwoch, den 05.03.2014, 19:05 +0800 schrieb Shawn Guo:
> On Wed, Mar 05, 2014 at 11:05:24AM +0100, Philipp Zabel wrote:
> > > > +static int imx_gpc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > > > +{
> > > > +	struct regulator *pu_reg;
> > > > +	struct clk *clk;
> > > > +	bool is_off;
> > > > +	int ret, i;
> > > > +
> > > > +	pu_reg = devm_regulator_get(&pdev->dev, "pu");
> > > > +	if (IS_ERR(pu_reg)) {
> > > > +		ret = PTR_ERR(pu_reg);
> > > > +		dev_err(&pdev->dev, "failed to get pu regulator: %d\n", ret);
> > > > +		return ret;
> > > > +	}
> > > > +
> > > > +	/* The regulator is initially enabled */
> > > > +	ret = regulator_enable(pu_reg);
> > > > +	if (ret < 0) {
> > > > +		dev_err(&pdev->dev, "failed to enable pu regulator: %d\n", ret);
> > > > +		return ret;
> > > > +	}
> > > > +	imx6q_pu_domain.base.of_node = pdev->dev.of_node;
> > > 
> > > How does this work with !CONFIG_PM build?
> > 
> > Since I removed the regulator-always-on property from the PU regulator
> > in the device tree, if CONFIG_PM is disabled, we have to request and
> > enable pu_reg here. Otherwise the regulator framework will helpfully
> > turn it off (imx6q-cpufreq never enables pu_reg).
> > With the PU regulator disabled, the system would hang as soon as the
> > CODA VPU or one of the Vivante GPU cores is accessed if !CONFIG_PM.
> 
> Sorry, I should have been more specific.  My question is how stuff like
> imx6q_pu_domain are available for !CONFIG_PM build, since they are only
> defined in #ifdef CONFIG_PM right above imx_gpc_probe().

Ouch, I misread the quoted context. Yes, everything starting from
imx6q_pu_domain.base.of_node = pdev->dev.of_node;
needs to be #ifdef CONFIG_PM.

regards
Philipp