On 2016年03月15日 03:08, Eduardo Valentin wrote:
> * PGP Signed by an unknown key
>
> On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 11:10:35AM +0800, Wei Ni wrote:
>> Add a debugfs interface to show register contents for debug.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Wei Ni <[email protected]>
>> ---
>> drivers/thermal/tegra/soctherm.c | 143
>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>> drivers/thermal/tegra/soctherm.h | 2 +
>> 2 files changed, 142 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/thermal/tegra/soctherm.c
>> b/drivers/thermal/tegra/soctherm.c
>> index 52a33760e8e8..02ac6d2e5a20 100644
>> --- a/drivers/thermal/tegra/soctherm.c
>> +++ b/drivers/thermal/tegra/soctherm.c
>> @@ -15,6 +15,7 @@
>> *
>> */
>>
>> +#include <linux/debugfs.h>
>> #include <linux/bitops.h>
>> #include <linux/clk.h>
>> #include <linux/delay.h>
>> @@ -33,14 +34,18 @@
>>
>> #define SENSOR_CONFIG0 0
>> #define SENSOR_CONFIG0_STOP BIT(0)
>> -#define SENSOR_CONFIG0_TALL_SHIFT 8
>> -#define SENSOR_CONFIG0_TCALC_OVER BIT(4)
>> -#define SENSOR_CONFIG0_OVER BIT(3)
>> #define SENSOR_CONFIG0_CPTR_OVER BIT(2)
>> +#define SENSOR_CONFIG0_OVER BIT(3)
>> +#define SENSOR_CONFIG0_TCALC_OVER BIT(4)
>> +#define SENSOR_CONFIG0_TALL_MASK (0xfffff << 8)
>> +#define SENSOR_CONFIG0_TALL_SHIFT 8
>>
>> #define SENSOR_CONFIG1 4
>> +#define SENSOR_CONFIG1_TSAMPLE_MASK 0x3ff
>> #define SENSOR_CONFIG1_TSAMPLE_SHIFT 0
>> +#define SENSOR_CONFIG1_TIDDQ_EN_MASK (0x3f << 15)
>> #define SENSOR_CONFIG1_TIDDQ_EN_SHIFT 15
>> +#define SENSOR_CONFIG1_TEN_COUNT_MASK (0x3f << 24)
>> #define SENSOR_CONFIG1_TEN_COUNT_SHIFT 24
>> #define SENSOR_CONFIG1_TEMP_ENABLE BIT(31)
>>
>> @@ -49,6 +54,14 @@
>> * because, it will be used by tegra_soctherm_fuse.c
>> */
>>
>> +#define SENSOR_STATUS0 0xc
>> +#define SENSOR_STATUS0_VALID_MASK BIT(31)
>> +#define SENSOR_STATUS0_CAPTURE_MASK 0xffff
>> +
>> +#define SENSOR_STATUS1 0x10
>> +#define SENSOR_STATUS1_TEMP_VALID_MASK BIT(31)
>> +#define SENSOR_STATUS1_TEMP_MASK 0xffff
>> +
>> #define READBACK_VALUE_MASK 0xff00
>> #define READBACK_VALUE_SHIFT 8
>> #define READBACK_ADD_HALF BIT(7)
>> @@ -73,6 +86,8 @@ struct tegra_soctherm {
>>
>> u32 *calib;
>> struct tegra_soctherm_soc *soc;
>> +
>> + struct dentry *debugfs_dir;
>> };
>>
>> static int enable_tsensor(struct tegra_soctherm *tegra,
>> @@ -140,6 +155,124 @@ static const struct thermal_zone_of_device_ops
>> tegra_of_thermal_ops = {
>> .get_temp = tegra_thermctl_get_temp,
>> };
>>
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_FS
>> +static int regs_show(struct seq_file *s, void *data)
>> +{
>> + struct platform_device *pdev = s->private;
>> + struct tegra_soctherm *ts = platform_get_drvdata(pdev);
>> + const struct tegra_tsensor *tsensors = ts->soc->tsensors;
>> + u32 r, state;
>> + int i;
>> +
>> + seq_puts(s, "-----TSENSE (convert HW)-----\n");
>> +
>> + for (i = 0; i < ts->soc->num_tsensors; i++) {
>> + r = readl(ts->regs + tsensors[i].base + SENSOR_CONFIG1);
>> + state = REG_GET_MASK(r, SENSOR_CONFIG1_TEMP_ENABLE);
>> + if (!state)
>> + continue;
>> +
>> + seq_printf(s, "%s: ", tsensors[i].name);
>> +
>> + seq_printf(s, "En(%d) ", state);
>
>
> Shouldnt the above if (!state) be place right here?
Yes, it make sense, will do it.
>
>
>> + state = REG_GET_MASK(r, SENSOR_CONFIG1_TIDDQ_EN_MASK);
>> + seq_printf(s, "tiddq(%d) ", state);
>> + state = REG_GET_MASK(r, SENSOR_CONFIG1_TEN_COUNT_MASK);
>> + seq_printf(s, "ten_count(%d) ", state);
>> + state = REG_GET_MASK(r, SENSOR_CONFIG1_TSAMPLE_MASK);
>> + seq_printf(s, "tsample(%d) ", state + 1);
>> +
>> + r = readl(ts->regs + tsensors[i].base + SENSOR_STATUS1);
>> + state = REG_GET_MASK(r, SENSOR_STATUS1_TEMP_VALID_MASK);
>> + seq_printf(s, "Temp(%d/", state);
>> + state = REG_GET_MASK(r, SENSOR_STATUS1_TEMP_MASK);
>> + seq_printf(s, "%d) ", translate_temp(state));
>> +
>> + r = readl(ts->regs + tsensors[i].base + SENSOR_STATUS0);
>> + state = REG_GET_MASK(r, SENSOR_STATUS0_VALID_MASK);
>> + seq_printf(s, "Capture(%d/", state);
>> + state = REG_GET_MASK(r, SENSOR_STATUS0_CAPTURE_MASK);
>> + seq_printf(s, "%d) ", state);
>> +
>> + r = readl(ts->regs + tsensors[i].base + SENSOR_CONFIG0);
>> + state = REG_GET_MASK(r, SENSOR_CONFIG0_STOP);
>> + seq_printf(s, "Stop(%d) ", state);
>> + state = REG_GET_MASK(r, SENSOR_CONFIG0_TALL_MASK);
>> + seq_printf(s, "Tall(%d) ", state);
>> + state = REG_GET_MASK(r, SENSOR_CONFIG0_TCALC_OVER);
>> + seq_printf(s, "Over(%d/", state);
>> + state = REG_GET_MASK(r, SENSOR_CONFIG0_OVER);
>> + seq_printf(s, "%d/", state);
>> + state = REG_GET_MASK(r, SENSOR_CONFIG0_CPTR_OVER);
>> + seq_printf(s, "%d) ", state);
>> +
>> + r = readl(ts->regs + tsensors[i].base + SENSOR_CONFIG2);
>> + state = REG_GET_MASK(r, SENSOR_CONFIG2_THERMA_MASK);
>> + seq_printf(s, "Therm_A/B(%d/", state);
>> + state = REG_GET_MASK(r, SENSOR_CONFIG2_THERMB_MASK);
>> + seq_printf(s, "%d)\n", (s16)state);
>> + }
>> +
>> + r = readl(ts->regs + SENSOR_PDIV);
>> + seq_printf(s, "PDIV: 0x%x\n", r);
>
> This is a matter of taste, but:
>
> Why here %x but all the above %d?
This register value contain CPU/GPU/MEM/PLLX's pdiv values, and didn't parse
them, so we need to use %x to print.
For above messages, we doesn't dump registers simply, we parsed these Reg
values, so we use %d for them, so that they are more readable.
>
> Reg dumps are typically %x.
See above explanation, and for this debugfs, we called it as "reg_context", not
"reg" simply.
>> +
>> + r = readl(ts->regs + SENSOR_HOTSPOT_OFF);
>> + seq_printf(s, "HOTSPOT: 0x%x\n", r);
>> +
>> + seq_puts(s, "\n");
>> + seq_puts(s, "-----SOC_THERM-----\n");
>> +
>> + r = readl(ts->regs + SENSOR_TEMP1);
>> + state = REG_GET_MASK(r, SENSOR_TEMP1_CPU_TEMP_MASK);
>> + seq_printf(s, "Temperatures: CPU(%d) ", translate_temp(state));
>
> Maybe a line break before CPU, for consistency?
-----TSENSE (convert HW)-----
cpu0: En(1) tiddq(1) ten_count(1) tsample(120) Temp(1/27500) Capture(1/8483)
Stop(0) Tall(16300) Over(1/1/1) Therm_A/B(1683/-1687)
cpu1: En(1) tiddq(1) ten_count(1) tsample(120) Temp(1/26500) Capture(1/8665)
Stop(0) Tall(16300) Over(1/1/1) Therm_A/B(1800/-1850)
cpu2: En(1) tiddq(1) ten_count(1) tsample(120) Temp(1/29000) Capture(1/8395)
Stop(0) Tall(16300) Over(1/1/1) Therm_A/B(1709/-1693)
cpu3: En(1) tiddq(1) ten_count(1) tsample(120) Temp(1/27500) Capture(1/8413)
Stop(0) Tall(16300) Over(1/1/1) Therm_A/B(1732/-1723)
mem0: En(1) tiddq(1) ten_count(1) tsample(120) Temp(1/28000) Capture(1/8563)
Stop(0) Tall(16300) Over(1/1/1) Therm_A/B(1670/-1689)
mem1: En(1) tiddq(1) ten_count(1) tsample(120) Temp(1/26500) Capture(1/8700)
Stop(0) Tall(16300) Over(1/1/1) Therm_A/B(1911/-1976)
gpu: En(1) tiddq(1) ten_count(1) tsample(120) Temp(0/0) Capture(0/0) Stop(0)
Tall(16300) Over(0/0/0) Therm_A/B(1714/-1730)
pllx: En(1) tiddq(1) ten_count(1) tsample(120) Temp(1/28000) Capture(1/8477)
Stop(0) Tall(16300) Over(1/1/1) Therm_A/B(1644/-1645)
PDIV: 0x8888
HOTSPOT: 0xa0500
-----SOC_THERM-----
Temperatures: CPU(29000) GPU(30500) PLLX(28000) MEM(28000)
Thermtrip Any En(0)
cpu En(1) Thresh(102500)
gpu En(1) Thresh(103000)
pll En(0) Thresh(105000)
mem En(0) Thresh(103000)
I paste this debufs output to here, it looks it is consistency :)
>
>> + state = REG_GET_MASK(r, SENSOR_TEMP1_GPU_TEMP_MASK);
>> + seq_printf(s, " GPU(%d) ", translate_temp(state));
>> + r = readl(ts->regs + SENSOR_TEMP2);
>> + state = REG_GET_MASK(r, SENSOR_TEMP2_PLLX_TEMP_MASK);
>> + seq_printf(s, " PLLX(%d) ", translate_temp(state));
>> + state = REG_GET_MASK(r, SENSOR_TEMP2_MEM_TEMP_MASK);
>> + seq_printf(s, " MEM(%d)\n", translate_temp(state));
>> +
>
> I got confused, I thought you would the above mapped as tsensors[i]. I
> will check the code again.
We have sensors of CPU0/1/2/3, MEM0/1, GPU and PLLX, and mapped as above
tsensors[i].
Here are the group temperatures of CPU, MEM, GPU, PLLX. These groups aggregate
the actual tsensors (count >= 1) and read out the max of all the sensors in a
particular group as ‘group temperature’ in TEMP1/2.
>
>
>> + return 0;
>> +}
>> +
>> +static int regs_open(struct inode *inode, struct file *file)
>> +{
>> + return single_open(file, regs_show, inode->i_private);
>> +}
>> +
>> +static const struct file_operations regs_fops = {
>> + .open = regs_open,
>> + .read = seq_read,
>> + .llseek = seq_lseek,
>> + .release = single_release,
>> +};
>> +
>> +static void soctherm_debug_init(struct platform_device *pdev)
>> +{
>> + struct tegra_soctherm *tegra = platform_get_drvdata(pdev);
>> + struct dentry *root, *file;
>> +
>> + root = debugfs_create_dir("soctherm", NULL);
>> + if (!root) {
>> + dev_err(&pdev->dev, "failed to create debugfs directory\n");
>> + return;
>> + }
>> +
>> + tegra->debugfs_dir = root;
>> +
>> + file = debugfs_create_file("reg_contents", 0644, root,
>> + pdev, ®s_fops);
>> + if (!file)
>> + dev_err(&pdev->dev, "failed to create debugfs file\n");
>
> Are we leaving the 'soctherm' dir left uncleaned in fail path here?
I will fix it.
>
>> +}
>> +#else
>> +static inline void soctherm_debug_init(struct platform_device *pdev)
>> +{
>> + return 0;
>
> I dont think we need this return for a void function.
Yes, will fix it.
>
>> +}
>> +#endif
>> +
>> static const struct of_device_id tegra_soctherm_of_match[] = {
>> #ifdef CONFIG_ARCH_TEGRA_124_SOC
>> {
>> @@ -279,6 +412,8 @@ static int tegra_soctherm_probe(struct platform_device
>> *pdev)
>> }
>> }
>>
>> + soctherm_debug_init(pdev);
>> +
>> return 0;
>>
>> disable_clocks:
>> @@ -292,6 +427,8 @@ static int tegra_soctherm_remove(struct platform_device
>> *pdev)
>> {
>> struct tegra_soctherm *tegra = platform_get_drvdata(pdev);
>>
>> + debugfs_remove_recursive(tegra->debugfs_dir);
>> +
>> clk_disable_unprepare(tegra->clock_tsensor);
>> clk_disable_unprepare(tegra->clock_soctherm);
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/thermal/tegra/soctherm.h
>> b/drivers/thermal/tegra/soctherm.h
>> index 69d317269af1..ec4b87616d01 100644
>> --- a/drivers/thermal/tegra/soctherm.h
>> +++ b/drivers/thermal/tegra/soctherm.h
>> @@ -16,7 +16,9 @@
>> #define __DRIVERS_THERMAL_TEGRA_SOCTHERM_H
>>
>> #define SENSOR_CONFIG2 8
>> +#define SENSOR_CONFIG2_THERMA_MASK (0xffff << 16)
>> #define SENSOR_CONFIG2_THERMA_SHIFT 16
>> +#define SENSOR_CONFIG2_THERMB_MASK 0xffff
>> #define SENSOR_CONFIG2_THERMB_SHIFT 0
>>
>> #define SENSOR_PDIV 0x1c0
>> --
>> 1.9.1
>>
>
> * Unknown Key
> * 0x7DA4E256
>
