[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20131022160523.GB24024@lee--X1>
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2013 17:05:23 +0100
From: Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>
To: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
Cc: Zubair Lutfullah <zubair.lutfullah@...il.com>,
sameo@...ux.intel.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
gregkh@...uxfoundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mfd: ti_am335x_tscadc: fix spin lock and reg_cache
On Tue, 22 Oct 2013, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> On 08/07/2013 10:40 AM, Lee Jones wrote:
> > On Mon, 05 Aug 2013, Zubair Lutfullah wrote:
> >
> >> Reg_cache variable is used to lock step enable register
> >> from being accessed and written by both TSC and ADC
> >> at the same time.
> >> However, it isn't updated anywhere in the code at all.
> >>
> >> If both TSC and ADC are used, eventually 1FFFF is always
> >> written enabling all 16 steps uselessly causing a mess.
> >>
> >> Patch fixes it by correcting the locks and updates the
> >> variable by reading the step enable register
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Zubair Lutfullah <zubair.lutfullah@...il.com>
> >> ---
> >> drivers/mfd/ti_am335x_tscadc.c | 4 ++--
> >> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > Better that it comes from somewhere.
>
> I don't understand. All three functions are used before the patch has
> been applied:
>
> $ git grep -l am335x_tsc_se_set
> drivers/iio/adc/ti_am335x_adc.c
> drivers/input/touchscreen/ti_am335x_tsc.c
> drivers/mfd/ti_am335x_tscadc.c
>
> $ git grep -l am335x_tsc_se_clr
> drivers/iio/adc/ti_am335x_adc.c
> drivers/input/touchscreen/ti_am335x_tsc.c
> drivers/mfd/ti_am335x_tscadc.c
>
> $ git grep -l am335x_tsc_se_update
> drivers/iio/adc/ti_am335x_adc.c
> drivers/input/touchscreen/ti_am335x_tsc.c
> drivers/mfd/ti_am335x_tscadc.c
> include/linux/mfd/ti_am335x_tscadc.h
>
> It has been initialized to 0 by time the mfd part was loaded and
> updated via …_set() from both parts (TSC & ADC). The lock ensured that
> we never lose or add bits due to a race. So I don't understand why we
> end up with 0x1FFFF.
> Could some please explain to me how this can happen?
>
> I added reg_se_cache to cache the content of REG_SE once and
> synchronize it among TSC & ADC access. REG_SE is set to 0 by the HW
> after "work" has been done. So you need to know the old value or TSC may
> disable ADC and the other way around.
Yep, it's initialised as '0'.
12.5.1.15 STEPENABLE Register (offset = 54h) [reset = 0h]
--
Lee Jones
Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead
Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists