| Message ID | 20200214172512.1.I02ebc5b8743b1a71e0e15f68ea77e506d4e6f840@changeid |
|---|---|
| State | Changes Requested, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | Add a watchdog driver that uses ARM Secure Monitor Calls. | expand |
| Context | Check | Description |
|---|---|---|
| robh/checkpatch | success | |
| robh/dt-meta-schema | success |
On Fri, Feb 14, 2020 at 05:26:36PM +1100, Evan Benn wrote: > This watchdog can be used on ARM systems with a Secure > Monitor firmware to forward watchdog operations to > firmware via a Secure Monitor Call. > > Signed-off-by: Evan Benn <evanbenn@chromium.org> > --- > > .../bindings/watchdog/arm,smc-wdt.yaml | 30 +++++++++++++++++++ > MAINTAINERS | 6 ++++ > 2 files changed, 36 insertions(+) > create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/watchdog/arm,smc-wdt.yaml > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/watchdog/arm,smc-wdt.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/watchdog/arm,smc-wdt.yaml > new file mode 100644 > index 000000000000..5170225b0c98 > --- /dev/null > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/watchdog/arm,smc-wdt.yaml > @@ -0,0 +1,30 @@ > +# SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause) > +%YAML 1.2 > +--- > +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/watchdog/arm,smc-wdt.yaml# > +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml# > + > +title: ARM Secure Monitor Call based watchdog You are not the first 'watchdog in firmware accessed via an SMC call'. Is there some more detail about what implementation this is? Part of TF-A? Defined by some spec (I can dream)? > + > +allOf: > + - $ref: "watchdog.yaml#" > + > +maintainers: > + - Julius Werner <jwerner@chromium.org> > + > +properties: > + compatible: > + enum: > + - arm,smc-wdt > + > +required: > + - compatible > + > +examples: > + - | > + watchdog { I'd expect this to be a child of whatever firmware implements this function. > + compatible = "arm,smc-wdt"; > + timeout-sec = <15>; > + }; > + > +... > diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS > index e48ab79879ac..5c45536e1177 100644 > --- a/MAINTAINERS > +++ b/MAINTAINERS > @@ -1421,6 +1421,12 @@ S: Maintained > F: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/interrupt-controller/amazon,al-fic.txt > F: drivers/irqchip/irq-al-fic.c > > +ARM SMC WATCHDOG DRIVER > +M: Julius Werner <jwerner@chromium.org> > +R: Evan Benn <evanbenn@chromium.org> > +S: Maintained > +F: devicetree/bindings/watchdog/arm,smc-wdt.yaml > + > ARM SMMU DRIVERS > M: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org> > R: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com> > -- > 2.25.0.265.gbab2e86ba0-goog >
> You are not the first 'watchdog in firmware accessed via an SMC call'. > Is there some more detail about what implementation this is? Part of > TF-A? Defined by some spec (I can dream)? This is just some random implementation written by me because we needed one. I would like it to be the new generic implementation, but it sounds like people here prefer the naming to be MediaTek specific (at least for now). The other SMC watchdog we're aware of is imx_sc_wdt but unfortunately that seems to hardcode platform-specific details in the interface (at least in the pretimeout SMC) so we can't just expand that. With this driver I tried to directly wrap the kernel watchdog interface so it should be platform-agnostic and possible to expand this driver to other platforms later if desired. The SMC function ID would still always have to be platform-specific, unfortunately (but we could pass it in through the device tree), since the Arm SMC spec doesn't really leave any room for OS-generic SMCs like this.
On Wed, Feb 19, 2020 at 03:04:54PM -0800, Julius Werner wrote: > > You are not the first 'watchdog in firmware accessed via an SMC call'. > > Is there some more detail about what implementation this is? Part of > > TF-A? Defined by some spec (I can dream)? > > This is just some random implementation written by me because we > needed one. I would like it to be the new generic implementation, but > it sounds like people here prefer the naming to be MediaTek specific > (at least for now). The other SMC watchdog we're aware of is > imx_sc_wdt but unfortunately that seems to hardcode platform-specific There is one more pending, for Meson SMC. https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-watchdog/list/?series=227733 Unfortunately it uses Meson firmware API functions, though it has pretty much the same functionality since those ultimately end up calling arm_smccc_smc(). Guenter > details in the interface (at least in the pretimeout SMC) so we can't > just expand that. With this driver I tried to directly wrap the kernel > watchdog interface so it should be platform-agnostic and possible to > expand this driver to other platforms later if desired. The SMC > function ID would still always have to be platform-specific, > unfortunately (but we could pass it in through the device tree), since > the Arm SMC spec doesn't really leave any room for OS-generic SMCs > like this.
Dear Xingyu, Could this driver also cover your usecase? I am not familiar with meson, but it seems like the meson calls could be replaced with arm_smccc calls. Then this driver will cover both chips. I am not sure if your firmware is upstream somewhere, but this might be adapted; https://review.trustedfirmware.org/c/TF-A/trusted-firmware-a/+/3405 Thanks On Thu, Feb 20, 2020 at 10:20 AM Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net> wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 19, 2020 at 03:04:54PM -0800, Julius Werner wrote: > > > You are not the first 'watchdog in firmware accessed via an SMC call'. > > > Is there some more detail about what implementation this is? Part of > > > TF-A? Defined by some spec (I can dream)? > > > > This is just some random implementation written by me because we > > needed one. I would like it to be the new generic implementation, but > > it sounds like people here prefer the naming to be MediaTek specific > > (at least for now). The other SMC watchdog we're aware of is > > imx_sc_wdt but unfortunately that seems to hardcode platform-specific > > There is one more pending, for Meson SMC. > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-watchdog/list/?series=227733 > > Unfortunately it uses Meson firmware API functions, though it has pretty > much the same functionality since those ultimately end up calling > arm_smccc_smc(). > > Guenter > > > details in the interface (at least in the pretimeout SMC) so we can't > > just expand that. With this driver I tried to directly wrap the kernel > > watchdog interface so it should be platform-agnostic and possible to > > expand this driver to other platforms later if desired. The SMC > > function ID would still always have to be platform-specific, > > unfortunately (but we could pass it in through the device tree), since > > the Arm SMC spec doesn't really leave any room for OS-generic SMCs > > like this.
On Thu, Feb 20, 2020 at 05:41:09PM +1100, Evan Benn wrote: > Dear Xingyu, > > Could this driver also cover your usecase? I am not familiar with > meson, but it seems like the meson calls could > be replaced with arm_smccc calls. Then this driver will cover both > chips. I am not sure if your firmware is upstream > somewhere, but this might be adapted; > https://review.trustedfirmware.org/c/TF-A/trusted-firmware-a/+/3405 > FWIW, the Meson driver has more functionality. Guenter > Thanks > > > On Thu, Feb 20, 2020 at 10:20 AM Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net> wrote: > > > > On Wed, Feb 19, 2020 at 03:04:54PM -0800, Julius Werner wrote: > > > > You are not the first 'watchdog in firmware accessed via an SMC call'. > > > > Is there some more detail about what implementation this is? Part of > > > > TF-A? Defined by some spec (I can dream)? > > > > > > This is just some random implementation written by me because we > > > needed one. I would like it to be the new generic implementation, but > > > it sounds like people here prefer the naming to be MediaTek specific > > > (at least for now). The other SMC watchdog we're aware of is > > > imx_sc_wdt but unfortunately that seems to hardcode platform-specific > > > > There is one more pending, for Meson SMC. > > > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-watchdog/list/?series=227733 > > > > Unfortunately it uses Meson firmware API functions, though it has pretty > > much the same functionality since those ultimately end up calling > > arm_smccc_smc(). > > > > Guenter > > > > > details in the interface (at least in the pretimeout SMC) so we can't > > > just expand that. With this driver I tried to directly wrap the kernel > > > watchdog interface so it should be platform-agnostic and possible to > > > expand this driver to other platforms later if desired. The SMC > > > function ID would still always have to be platform-specific, > > > unfortunately (but we could pass it in through the device tree), since > > > the Arm SMC spec doesn't really leave any room for OS-generic SMCs > > > like this.
Hi, Evan Because the ATF does not define standard wdt index, each vendor defines its own index. So I don't think that the current driver[0] can fully cover my usecases. As discussed in your previous email, the meson wdt driver [1] can use the arm_smccc instead of meson_sm_call. [0]: https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11395579/ [1]: https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11331271/ Best Regards On 2020/2/20 14:41, Evan Benn wrote: > Dear Xingyu, > > Could this driver also cover your usecase? I am not familiar with > meson, but it seems like the meson calls could > be replaced with arm_smccc calls. Then this driver will cover both > chips. I am not sure if your firmware is upstream > somewhere, but this might be adapted; > https://review.trustedfirmware.org/c/TF-A/trusted-firmware-a/+/3405 > > Thanks > > > On Thu, Feb 20, 2020 at 10:20 AM Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net> wrote: >> On Wed, Feb 19, 2020 at 03:04:54PM -0800, Julius Werner wrote: >>>> You are not the first 'watchdog in firmware accessed via an SMC call'. >>>> Is there some more detail about what implementation this is? Part of >>>> TF-A? Defined by some spec (I can dream)? >>> This is just some random implementation written by me because we >>> needed one. I would like it to be the new generic implementation, but >>> it sounds like people here prefer the naming to be MediaTek specific >>> (at least for now). The other SMC watchdog we're aware of is >>> imx_sc_wdt but unfortunately that seems to hardcode platform-specific >> There is one more pending, for Meson SMC. >> >> https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-watchdog/list/?series=227733 >> >> Unfortunately it uses Meson firmware API functions, though it has pretty >> much the same functionality since those ultimately end up calling >> arm_smccc_smc(). >> >> Guenter >> >>> details in the interface (at least in the pretimeout SMC) so we can't >>> just expand that. With this driver I tried to directly wrap the kernel >>> watchdog interface so it should be platform-agnostic and possible to >>> expand this driver to other platforms later if desired. The SMC >>> function ID would still always have to be platform-specific, >>> unfortunately (but we could pass it in through the device tree), since >>> the Arm SMC spec doesn't really leave any room for OS-generic SMCs >>> like this. > .
> Because the ATF does not define standard wdt index, each vendor defines > its own index. > So I don't think that the current driver[0] can fully cover my usecases. I think the best way to solve this would be to put the SMC function ID as another field into the device tree, so that multiple vendors could share the same driver even if their firmware interface uses a different SMC. But they still have to implement the same API for that SMC, of course, not sure if the Meson driver is suitable for that (but if it is then I think merging those drivers would be a good idea).
On Fri, Feb 21, 2020 at 11:41:47AM -0800, Julius Werner wrote: > > Because the ATF does not define standard wdt index, each vendor defines > > its own index. > > So I don't think that the current driver[0] can fully cover my usecases. > > I think the best way to solve this would be to put the SMC function ID > as another field into the device tree, so that multiple vendors could > share the same driver even if their firmware interface uses a > different SMC. But they still have to implement the same API for that > SMC, of course, not sure if the Meson driver is suitable for that (but > if it is then I think merging those drivers would be a good idea). More common would be to have a single driver and multiple compatible strings. The driver would then pick the SMC function ID from the compatible string. After all, we'd not only need the SMC function ID; parameters are also different. Guenter
Hi, Julius On 2020/2/22 3:41, Julius Werner wrote: >> Because the ATF does not define standard wdt index, each vendor defines >> its own index. >> So I don't think that the current driver[0] can fully cover my usecases. > I think the best way to solve this would be to put the SMC function ID > as another field into the device tree, so that multiple vendors could > share the same driver even if their firmware interface uses a > different SMC. But they still have to implement the same API for that > SMC, of course, not sure if the Meson driver is suitable for that (but > if it is then I think merging those drivers would be a good idea). The SMC function ID may be solved by the DTS, but the wdt indexs(Eg: SMCWD_INFO) are also different for each vendor. The imx_sc_wdt.c is also use the SMC to operate the WDT, but the wdt indexs(Eg: IMX_SIP_TIMER_START_WDOG) are different from ours. IMO, If the ATF can implement a common hal interface and index for watchdog, then writing a common smc wdt driver will be easier to compatible with all vendors. Best Regards > > .
Hello, I think the intention is that this driver talks to a 'standard' arm smc firmware watchdog call: https://review.trustedfirmware.org/c/TF-A/trusted-firmware-a/+/3405 Each device could re-implement that ATF driver to talk to the specific hardware, and could perhaps use a custom SMCWD_FUNC_ID, defined in the dts. The goal was to provide an ATF patch and linux driver patch that would be generic. But the above ATF patch is only for mt8173. Right now it just specifies an interface. It has less functionality than your meson driver Xingyu. If it is not suitable, that is fine. The above ATF patch is deployed on oak, elm, and hana mt8173 chromebook devices, this driver is intended to support those devices. Evan On Sat, Feb 22, 2020 at 3:01 PM Xingyu Chen <xingyu.chen@amlogic.com> wrote: > > Hi, Julius > > On 2020/2/22 3:41, Julius Werner wrote: > >> Because the ATF does not define standard wdt index, each vendor defines > >> its own index. > >> So I don't think that the current driver[0] can fully cover my usecases. > > I think the best way to solve this would be to put the SMC function ID > > as another field into the device tree, so that multiple vendors could > > share the same driver even if their firmware interface uses a > > different SMC. But they still have to implement the same API for that > > SMC, of course, not sure if the Meson driver is suitable for that (but > > if it is then I think merging those drivers would be a good idea). > The SMC function ID may be solved by the DTS, but the wdt indexs(Eg: > SMCWD_INFO) are also different > for each vendor. The imx_sc_wdt.c is also use the SMC to operate the > WDT, but the wdt indexs(Eg: IMX_SIP_TIMER_START_WDOG) > are different from ours. IMO, If the ATF can implement a common hal > interface and index for watchdog, then writing a > common smc wdt driver will be easier to compatible with all vendors. > > Best Regards > > > > .
> The SMC function ID may be solved by the DTS, but the wdt indexs(Eg: > SMCWD_INFO) are also different > for each vendor. The imx_sc_wdt.c is also use the SMC to operate the > WDT, but the wdt indexs(Eg: IMX_SIP_TIMER_START_WDOG) > are different from ours. IMO, If the ATF can implement a common hal > interface and index for watchdog, then writing a > common smc wdt driver will be easier to compatible with all vendors. The MediaTek driver is still in flux (e.g. still being reviewed in Trusted Firmware here: https://review.trustedfirmware.org/c/TF-A/trusted-firmware-a/+/3405), we can still change it. So if we can now decide on making this a "standard" driver, we can change the MediaTek interface to match IMX and standardize on that. (There are existing Chromebooks shipped with a different interface, but we could handle those separately with downstream patches. I think having a unified interface that will prevent this problem in the future would be worth some extra complication right now.)
Hi, Julius On 2020/2/25 9:23, Julius Werner wrote: >> The SMC function ID may be solved by the DTS, but the wdt indexs(Eg: >> SMCWD_INFO) are also different >> for each vendor. The imx_sc_wdt.c is also use the SMC to operate the >> WDT, but the wdt indexs(Eg: IMX_SIP_TIMER_START_WDOG) >> are different from ours. IMO, If the ATF can implement a common hal >> interface and index for watchdog, then writing a >> common smc wdt driver will be easier to compatible with all vendors. > The MediaTek driver is still in flux (e.g. still being reviewed in > Trusted Firmware here: > https://review.trustedfirmware.org/c/TF-A/trusted-firmware-a/+/3405), > we can still change it. So if we can now decide on making this a > "standard" driver, we can change the MediaTek interface to match IMX > and standardize on that. (There are existing Chromebooks shipped with > a different interface, but we could handle those separately with > downstream patches. I think having a unified interface that will > prevent this problem in the future would be worth some extra > complication right now.) If the ATF provides a common watchdog hal interface and index, I am happy to match the generic sec wdt driver. Compared to the current MTK wdt index [0], the following indexes need to be supported for meson wdt [1]. - *_INIT. - *_GETTIMEOUT. - *_RESETNOW. It is used to reset the system right now, similar to your SOFT RESET. For another platform-specific parameter "SMC function ID", the generic sec wdt driver can get it from the dts, but if the driver want to compatible with more vendors in the future, maybe we should consider Guenter's suggestion at [2] [0]: https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11395579/ [1]: https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11331271/ [2]: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-watchdog/20200220155159.GB29658@roeck-us.net/T/#md00328548222965054cd19ec7dda074f8fc09fe2 Best Regards > .
Hi Xingyu, I am trying to establish some clarity about what to do here. The trusted firmware review has now been accepted https://review.trustedfirmware.org/c/TF-A/trusted-firmware-a/+/3405. I could try to add your mentioned extra operation indexes to the ATF watchdog, to try to establish a standard ATF smc watchdog interface. Hypothetically then your linux driver could connect to any of the ATF watchdogs, apart from the meson indirection layer. I do not quite understand the meson layer to be honest, would we run the meson layer on non-amlogic SOCs? It looks feasible to strip the meson part from your driver so that it works on more socs, please correct me if I am wrong. Alternatively we could also add these extra operation indexes to this linux driver. Unfortunately I would not have a way to test that. Thanks Evan On Tue, Feb 25, 2020 at 6:43 PM Xingyu Chen <xingyu.chen@amlogic.com> wrote: > > Hi, Julius > > On 2020/2/25 9:23, Julius Werner wrote: > >> The SMC function ID may be solved by the DTS, but the wdt indexs(Eg: > >> SMCWD_INFO) are also different > >> for each vendor. The imx_sc_wdt.c is also use the SMC to operate the > >> WDT, but the wdt indexs(Eg: IMX_SIP_TIMER_START_WDOG) > >> are different from ours. IMO, If the ATF can implement a common hal > >> interface and index for watchdog, then writing a > >> common smc wdt driver will be easier to compatible with all vendors. > > The MediaTek driver is still in flux (e.g. still being reviewed in > > Trusted Firmware here: > > https://review.trustedfirmware.org/c/TF-A/trusted-firmware-a/+/3405), > > we can still change it. So if we can now decide on making this a > > "standard" driver, we can change the MediaTek interface to match IMX > > and standardize on that. (There are existing Chromebooks shipped with > > a different interface, but we could handle those separately with > > downstream patches. I think having a unified interface that will > > prevent this problem in the future would be worth some extra > > complication right now.) > If the ATF provides a common watchdog hal interface and index, I am > happy to match > the generic sec wdt driver. Compared to the current MTK wdt index [0], > the following > indexes need to be supported for meson wdt [1]. > - *_INIT. > - *_GETTIMEOUT. > - *_RESETNOW. It is used to reset the system right now, similar to your > SOFT RESET. > > For another platform-specific parameter "SMC function ID", the generic > sec wdt driver can get it from the dts, but if > the driver want to compatible with more vendors in the future, maybe we > should consider Guenter's suggestion at [2] > > [0]: https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11395579/ > [1]: https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11331271/ > [2]: > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-watchdog/20200220155159.GB29658@roeck-us.net/T/#md00328548222965054cd19ec7dda074f8fc09fe2 > > Best Regards > > .
> - *_INIT and *GETTIMEOUT. Although your driver does not need them, could you take them as options in your driver ? The driver already has SMCWD_INFO which is used during probe to retrieve the minimum and maximum timeout values supported by the hardware at probe time. Maybe it would make sense to rename that to INIT (which would still return those values, but can also do whatever initialization needs to be done in TF)? GETTIMELEFT I agree we can implement optionally, and other platforms would just return a PSCI_RET_NOT_SUPPORTED for that. > - *_RESETNOW. It is used to reset the system right now, similar to your SOFT RESET. could you reserve an operation index in ATF ? Just curious, why do you need this? Shouldn't you use the PSCI standard SYSTEM_RESET SMC for that? (If you want to control exactly how the platform is reset, you could also use SYSTEM_RESET2 with a vendor-defined reset_type.)
Hi, Julius On 2020/3/12 3:24, Julius Werner wrote: >> - *_INIT and *GETTIMEOUT. Although your driver does not need them, could you take them as options in your driver ? > The driver already has SMCWD_INFO which is used during probe to > retrieve the minimum and maximum timeout values supported by the > hardware at probe time. Maybe it would make sense to rename that to > INIT (which would still return those values, but can also do whatever > initialization needs to be done in TF)? Yes，INIT would make sense for me. > GETTIMELEFT I agree we can > implement optionally, and other platforms would just return a > PSCI_RET_NOT_SUPPORTED for that. > >> - *_RESETNOW. It is used to reset the system right now, similar to your SOFT RESET. could you reserve an operation index in ATF ? > Just curious, why do you need this? Shouldn't you use the PSCI > standard SYSTEM_RESET SMC for that? (If you want to control exactly > how the platform is reset, you could also use SYSTEM_RESET2 with a > vendor-defined reset_type.) I just wanted it to be compatible with other OS，and I think it over, maybe I can also use the PSCI interface to execuate the system reset on the other OS. Anyway, please ignore this request. Thanks. > > .
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/watchdog/arm,smc-wdt.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/watchdog/arm,smc-wdt.yaml new file mode 100644 index 000000000000..5170225b0c98 --- /dev/null +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/watchdog/arm,smc-wdt.yaml @@ -0,0 +1,30 @@ +# SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause) +%YAML 1.2 +--- +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/watchdog/arm,smc-wdt.yaml# +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml# + +title: ARM Secure Monitor Call based watchdog + +allOf: + - $ref: "watchdog.yaml#" + +maintainers: + - Julius Werner <jwerner@chromium.org> + +properties: + compatible: + enum: + - arm,smc-wdt + +required: + - compatible + +examples: + - | + watchdog { + compatible = "arm,smc-wdt"; + timeout-sec = <15>; + }; + +... diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS index e48ab79879ac..5c45536e1177 100644 --- a/MAINTAINERS +++ b/MAINTAINERS @@ -1421,6 +1421,12 @@ S: Maintained F: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/interrupt-controller/amazon,al-fic.txt F: drivers/irqchip/irq-al-fic.c +ARM SMC WATCHDOG DRIVER +M: Julius Werner <jwerner@chromium.org> +R: Evan Benn <evanbenn@chromium.org> +S: Maintained +F: devicetree/bindings/watchdog/arm,smc-wdt.yaml + ARM SMMU DRIVERS M: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org> R: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>
This watchdog can be used on ARM systems with a Secure Monitor firmware to forward watchdog operations to firmware via a Secure Monitor Call. Signed-off-by: Evan Benn <evanbenn@chromium.org> --- .../bindings/watchdog/arm,smc-wdt.yaml | 30 +++++++++++++++++++ MAINTAINERS | 6 ++++ 2 files changed, 36 insertions(+) create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/watchdog/arm,smc-wdt.yaml