Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[otbn] Fix interpretation of lc_rma_req signal values #21272

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Feb 9, 2024

Conversation

vogelpi
Copy link
Contributor

@vogelpi vogelpi commented Feb 9, 2024

Now that #21267 changes LC_CTRL to receive multiple RMA ack signals in parallel and the RMA req/ack signals for Flash and OTBN are no longer daisy-chained in Earlgrey, this change can and must be done because:

  • A glitch into the RMA req/ack signals can no longer bypass Flash wiping before RMA entry. I.e., the checking of the RMA req signal in OTBN can thus be fully aligned with the LC_CTRL spec.
  • The RMA req signal seen by OTBN is no coming from a different clock domain and OTBN will observe staggered transitions. By aligning the signal interpretation in OTBN with the LC_CTRL spec, it can actually handle that.

Note that this is a cherry pick of 388567f from the intergrated_dev branch:

According to the lc_ctrl spec, all values of non-escalation lc signals other than ON must be intrepreted as OFF. Also, no detection of invalid values should be performed as these signals might experience staggered transitions due to CDCs naturally leading to invalid values.

This commit changes the design accordingly to match this spec.

This resolves #19050.

According to the lc_ctrl spec, all values of non-escalation lc signals
other than ON must be intrepreted as OFF. Also, no detection of invalid
values should be performed as these signals might experience staggered
transitions due to CDCs naturally leading to invalid values.

This commit changes the design  accordingly to match this spec.

This resolves lowRISC#19050.

Signed-off-by: Pirmin Vogel <vogelpi@lowrisc.org>
@vogelpi vogelpi requested a review from a team as a code owner February 9, 2024 10:34
@vogelpi vogelpi requested review from rswarbrick, msfschaffner and andreaskurth and removed request for a team February 9, 2024 10:34
@vogelpi
Copy link
Contributor Author

vogelpi commented Feb 9, 2024

@rswarbrick this might cause similar failures on master as you observed in integrated_dev recently and reported in #20835 .

Copy link
Contributor

@msfschaffner msfschaffner left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM!

@msfschaffner msfschaffner merged commit 5228dfc into lowRISC:master Feb 9, 2024
@GregAC GregAC mentioned this pull request Mar 12, 2024
@vogelpi vogelpi deleted the otbn-rma-ack branch March 19, 2024 12:24
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

[otbn] Fix OTBN usage of life cycle control signals
2 participants