RE: [PATCH v7 2/2] EDAC/zynqmp: Add EDAC support for Xilinx ZynqMP OCM
From: "Potthuri, Sai Krishna" <sai.krishna.potthuri@amd.com>
Date: 2023-01-09 06:09:15
Also in:
linux-devicetree, linux-edac, lkml
Hi Boris,
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
-----Original Message----- From: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de> Sent: Sunday, January 8, 2023 10:28 PM To: Potthuri, Sai Krishna <sai.krishna.potthuri@amd.com> Cc: Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>; Krzysztof Kozlowski [off-list ref]; Michal Simek [off-list ref]; Mauro Carvalho Chehab [off-list ref]; Tony Luck [off-list ref]; James Morse [off-list ref]; Robert Richter [off-list ref]; devicetree@vger.kernel.org; linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; linux- kernel@vger.kernel.org; linux-edac@vger.kernel.org; saikrishna12468@gmail.com; git (AMD-Xilinx) [off-list ref]; Datta, Shubhrajyoti [off-list ref]; kernel test robot [off-list ref] Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 2/2] EDAC/zynqmp: Add EDAC support for Xilinx ZynqMP OCM On Wed, Jan 04, 2023 at 02:15:12PM +0530, Sai Krishna Potthuri wrote:quoted
Add EDAC support for Xilinx ZynqMP OCM Controller, so this driver reports CE and UE errors upon interrupt generation, and also creates UE/CE debugfs entries for error injection. On Xilinx ZynqMP platform, both OCM Controller driver(zynqmp_edac) and DDR Memory Controller driver(synopsys_edac) co-exist which means both can be loaded at a time. This scenario is tested on Xilinx ZynqMP platform. Fix following issue reported by the robot. "MAINTAINERS references a file that doesn't exist: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/edac/xlnx,zynqmp-ocmc.yaml" Co-developed-by: Shubhrajyoti Datta <shubhrajyoti.datta@amd.com> Signed-off-by: Shubhrajyoti Datta <shubhrajyoti.datta@amd.com> Signed-off-by: Sai Krishna Potthuri <sai.krishna.potthuri@amd.com> Reported-by: kernel test robot <redacted> --- MAINTAINERS | 7 + drivers/edac/Kconfig | 9 + drivers/edac/Makefile | 1 + drivers/edac/zynqmp_edac.c | 465 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 4 files changed, 482 insertions(+) create mode 100644 drivers/edac/zynqmp_edac.cSome touchups ontop, see below. I had to revert back to the #ifdeffery because IS_ENABLED doesn't prevent the compiler from looking inside the conditional... Anyway, inter-diff below. Holler if something's still amiss. Thx. --- diff --git a/drivers/edac/Kconfig b/drivers/edac/Kconfig -index 58ab63642e72..7944e40c67da 100644 +index 4cfdefbd744d..68f576700911 100644 --- a/drivers/edac/Kconfig +++ b/drivers/edac/Kconfig -@@ -539,4 +539,13 @@ config EDAC_DMC520 +@@ -542,4 +542,12 @@ config EDAC_DMC520 Support for error detection and correction on the SoCs with ARM DMC-520 DRAM controller. -+config EDAC_ZYNQMP_OCM ++config EDAC_ZYNQMP + tristate "Xilinx ZynqMP OCM Controller" + depends on ARCH_ZYNQMP || COMPILE_TEST + help + This driver supports error detection and correction for the -+ Xilinx ZynqMP OCM (On Chip Memory) controller. -+ This driver can also be built as a module. If so, the module -+ will be called zynqmp_ocm_edac. ++ Xilinx ZynqMP OCM (On Chip Memory) controller. It can also be ++ built as a module. In that case it will be called zynqmp_edac. + endif # EDAC diff --git a/drivers/edac/Makefile b/drivers/edac/Makefile -index 2d1641a27a28..47cbda06d7b0 100644 +index 2d1641a27a28..9b025c5b3061 100644 --- a/drivers/edac/Makefile +++ b/drivers/edac/Makefile @@ -84,3 +84,4 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_EDAC_QCOM) += qcom_edac.o obj-$(CONFIG_EDAC_ASPEED) += aspeed_edac.o obj-$(CONFIG_EDAC_BLUEFIELD) += bluefield_edac.o obj-$(CONFIG_EDAC_DMC520) += dmc520_edac.o -+obj-$(CONFIG_EDAC_ZYNQMP_OCM) += zynqmp_edac.o ++obj-$(CONFIG_EDAC_ZYNQMP) += zynqmp_edac.o diff --git a/drivers/edac/zynqmp_edac.c b/drivers/edac/zynqmp_edac.c new file mode 100644 -index 000000000000..69069028457b +index 000000000000..b11f1157d4bb --- /dev/null +++ b/drivers/edac/zynqmp_edac.c -@@ -0,0 +1,465 @@ +@@ -0,0 +1,469 @@ +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 +/* + * Xilinx ZynqMP OCM ECC Driver@@ -220,12 +224,14 @@ index 000000000000..69069028457b + p->ceinfo.fault_hi = readl(base + CE_FFD1_OFST); + p->ceinfo.addr = (OCM_BASEVAL | readl(base +CE_FFA_OFST)); + writel(ECC_CTRL_CLR_CE_ERR, base + OCM_ISR_OFST); -+ } else { ++ } else if (mask & OCM_UEINTR_MASK) { + p->ue_cnt++; + p->ueinfo.fault_lo = readl(base + UE_FFD0_OFST); + p->ueinfo.fault_hi = readl(base + UE_FFD1_OFST); + p->ueinfo.addr = (OCM_BASEVAL | readl(base + UE_FFA_OFST)); + writel(ECC_CTRL_CLR_UE_ERR, base + OCM_ISR_OFST); ++ } else { ++ WARN_ON_ONCE(1); + }
As we are raising a warning message in intr_handler() if the flagged interrupt
is not UE or CE and we return from there, so do we really need else if{} and
WARN_ON_ONCE() in else{} here?
Regards
Sai Krishna
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel