On Monday 10 October 2022 13:40:38 Tom Rini wrote: > On Mon, Oct 10, 2022 at 07:22:56PM +0200, Pali Rohár wrote: > > On Monday 10 October 2022 12:28:18 Tom Rini wrote: > > > On Sun, Oct 09, 2022 at 09:12:25PM +0200, Pali Rohár wrote: > > > > Hello! Watchdog code seems to be broken in u-boot master branch. > > > > On Nokia N900 I'm getting following message in qemu: > > > > > > > > cyclic function rx51_watchdog took too long: 10000us vs 1000us max, > > > > disabling > > > > > > > > Seems that watchdog core code is not prepared for "slower" watchdogs > > > > which communicate over slower i2c bus, like it is the case for N900. > > > > > > > > Disabling slower watchdog is a bad idea as it would result in reboot > > > > loop instead of slower - but working code. > > > > > > So, looking at this in more detail, we have > > > CONFIG_CYCLIC_MAX_CPU_TIME_US as a configuration option (which is where > > > the too long comes from). And picking a random CI run: > > > https://source.denx.de/u-boot/u-boot/-/jobs/511177 > > > I do see we hit this in CI once, but not every time, QEMU runs here. Is > > > that the max time is configurable enough to satisfy your concerns here? > > > > It is needed to investigate, how to _properly_ fix this issue, not just > > workarounded it. Probably other boards may be affected. > > So it's the cyclic watchdog code, which we merged as early as possible > that's the reason here. And it was merged as early as we could to see if > there's problems. Are there problems? We're seeing "system too slow, > disabling" on QEMU, sometimes, and the value of too slow is > configurable. I know you reported other problems with n900 HW, so we > can't see if it's failing there
I was tested it with older asm code (as described in that other email, via git checkout commit -- file) on n900 HW and watchdog problem is there too. Phone reboots in about 20 seconds. But as I do not have serial console, I do not know if that "disabling" message is printed there too (but I guess it is). > and I don't have any omap3 HW setup in > my lab atm, just newer generation boards and don't see the problem > there. Which is why I'm asking, is being able to configure the "too > slow" value enough? Or is there something else that needs to be done?
