| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-ID: <1422955485.2177.31.camel@mm-sol.com>
Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2015 11:24:45 +0200
From: "Ivan T. Ivanov" <iivanov@...sol.com>
To: Eduardo Valentin <edubezval@...il.com>
Cc: Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@...el.com>, Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@....com>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Ian Campbell <ijc+devicetree@...lion.org.uk>,
Kumar Gala <galak@...eaurora.org>, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
David Collins <collinsd@...eaurora.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] thermal: Add QPNP PMIC temperature alarm driver
Hi Eduardo,
On Mon, 2015-02-02 at 14:14 -0400, Eduardo Valentin wrote:
> Ivan,
>
> On Mon, Feb 02, 2015 at 05:19:30PM +0200, Ivan T. Ivanov wrote:
> > Add support for the temperature alarm peripheral found inside
> > Qualcomm plug-and-play (QPNP) PMIC chips. The temperature alarm
> > peripheral outputs a pulse on an interrupt line whenever the
> > thermal over temperature stage value changes.
> >
> > Register a thermal sensor. The temperature reported by this thermal
> > sensor device should reflect the actual PMIC die temperature if an
> > ADC is present on the given PMIC. If no ADC is present, then the
> > reported temperature should be estimated from the over temperature
> > stage value.
> >
> > Cc: David Collins <collinsd@...eaurora.org>
> > Signed-off-by: Ivan T. Ivanov <iivanov@...sol.com>
> > ---
> >
> > Changes since v3:
> >
> > - Driver register thermal sensor instead thermal zone. Device thermal zone
> > should be properly described in DT files according thermal.txt document.
>
> Thanks a lot for keeping this up. I believe the driver looks smaller and
> cleaner now, don't you agree?
Yep.
>
> > - Dropped support for software override PMIC shutdown sequence and related
> > bit definitions. If software did not take action for clean device shutdown,
> > until critical temperature is reached, PMIC chip will execute internal
> > pre-programed shutdown sequence.
> >
>
> OK. Let me know if this functionality is crucial and needs further
> discussion.
Unless I miss something, I think that this functionality is
used only for the purpose of debugging.
>
>
> I have two very minor comments as follows.
>
>
> > v3: http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.linux.ports.arm.msm/10071
> >
> > .../bindings/thermal/qcom-spmi-temp-alarm.txt | 57 ++++
> > drivers/thermal/Kconfig | 11 +
> > drivers/thermal/Makefile | 1 +
> > drivers/thermal/qcom-spmi-temp-alarm.c | 311 +++++++++++++++++++++
> > 4 files changed, 380 insertions(+)
> > create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/thermal/qcom-spmi-temp-alarm.txt
> > create mode 100644 drivers/thermal/qcom-spmi-temp-alarm.c
> >
> > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/thermal/qcom-spmi-temp-alarm.txt
> > b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/thermal/qcom-spmi-temp-alarm.txt
> > new file mode 100644
> > index 0000000..290ec06
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/thermal/qcom-spmi-temp-alarm.txt
> > @@ -0,0 +1,57 @@
> > +Qualcomm QPNP PMIC Temperature Alarm
> > +
> > +QPNP temperature alarm peripherals are found inside of Qualcomm PMIC chips
> > +that utilize the Qualcomm SPMI implementation. These peripherals provide an
> > +interrupt signal and status register to identify high PMIC die temperature.
> > +
> > +Required properties:
> > +- compatible: Should contain "qcom,spmi-temp-alarm".
> > +- reg: Specifies the SPMI address and length of the controller's
> > + registers.
> > +- interrupts: PMIC temperature alarm interrupt.
> > +- #thermal-sensor-cells: Should be 0. See thermal.txt for a description.
> > +
> > +Optional properties:
> > +- io-channels: Should contain IIO channel specifier for the ADC channel,
> > + which report chip die temperature.
> > +- io-channel-names: Should contain "thermal".
> > +
> > +Example:
> > +
> > + pm8941_temp: thermal-alarm@...0 {
> > + compatible = "qcom,spmi-temp-alarm";
> > + reg = <0x2400 0x100>;
> > + interrupts = <0 0x24 0 IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING>;
> > + #thermal-sensor-cells = <0>;
> > +
> > + io-channels = <&pm8941_vadc VADC_DIE_TEMP>;
> > + io-channel-names = "thermal";
> > + };
> > +
> > + thermal-zones {
> > + pm8941 {
> > + polling-delay-passive = <250>;
> > + polling-delay = <1000>;
> > +
> > + thermal-sensors = <&pm8941_temp>;
> > +
> > + trips {
> > + passive {
> > + temperature = <1050000>;
> > + hysteresis = <2000>;
> > + type = "passive";
> > + };
> > + alert {
> > + temperature = <125000>;
> > + hysteresis = <2000>;
> > + type = "hot";
> > + };
> > + crit {
> > + temperature = <145000>;
> > + hysteresis = <2000>;
> > + type = "critical";
> > + };
> > + };
> > + };
> > + };
>
> Do you have the appropriate DT changes under architecture code too?
>
> I mean, I am fine picking these changes, but should this series include
> also a minor inclusion under arch/arm/boot/dts too, given that you
> already did the hard part?
We don't have any DT files for these PMIC's upstream. Probably is time
to start adding them. I have waiting to have some drivers accepted
before pushing such changes. But not we have 2 types of ADC, RTC, GPIO's,
MPP's and hopefully Thermal :-). I would like this to be a separate effort.
> > + * This function updates the internal temp value based on the
> > + * current thermal stage and threshold as well as the previous stage
> > + */
> > +static int qpnp_tm_update_temp_no_adc(struct qpnp_tm_chip *chip)
> > +{
> > + unsigned int stage;
> > + int ret;
> > + u8 reg = 0;
> > +
> > + ret = qpnp_tm_read(chip, QPNP_TM_REG_STATUS, ®);
> > + if (ret < 0)
> > + return ret;
> > +
> > + stage = reg & STATUS_STAGE_MASK;
> > +
> > + if (stage > chip->stage) {
> > + /* increasing stage, use lower bound */
> > + chip->temp = (stage - 1) * TEMP_STAGE_STEP +
> > + chip->thresh * TEMP_THRESH_STEP
> > +
> > + TEMP_STAGE_HYSTERESIS +
> > TEMP_THRESH_MIN;
> > + } else if (stage < chip->stage) {
> > + /* decreasing stage, use upper bound */
> > + chip->temp = stage * TEMP_STAGE_STEP +
> > + chip->thresh * TEMP_THRESH_STEP
> > -
> > + TEMP_STAGE_HYSTERESIS +
> > TEMP_THRESH_MIN;
> > + }
>
> For my own edification, no change in state means no change in
> temperature too, right?
More or less, just no way to estimate exact temperature
between stages.
>
> > +
> > + chip->stage = stage;
> > +
> > + return 0;
> > +}
> > +
<snip>
> > +static int qpnp_tm_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > +{
> > + struct qpnp_tm_chip *chip;
> > + struct device_node *node;
> > + u8 type, subtype;
> > + u32 res[2];
> > + int ret, irq;
> > +
> > + node = pdev->dev.of_node;
> > +
> > + chip = devm_kzalloc(&pdev->dev, sizeof(*chip), GFP_KERNEL);
> > + if (!chip)
> > + return -ENOMEM;
> > +
> > + dev_set_drvdata(&pdev->dev, chip);
> > +
> > + chip->map = dev_get_regmap(pdev->dev.parent, NULL);
> > + if (!chip->map)
> > + return -ENXIO;
> > +
> > + ret = of_property_read_u32_array(node, "reg", res, 2);
> > + if (ret < 0)
> > + return ret;
> > +
> > + /* ADC based measurements are optional */
> > + chip->adc = iio_channel_get(&pdev->dev, "thermal");
> > + if (PTR_ERR(chip->adc) == -EPROBE_DEFER)
> > + return PTR_ERR(chip->adc);
> > +
> > + irq = platform_get_irq(pdev, 0);
> > + if (irq < 0)
> > + return irq;
> > +
> > + chip->base = res[0];
> > +
> > + ret = qpnp_tm_read(chip, QPNP_TM_REG_TYPE, &type);
> > + if (ret < 0) {
> > + dev_err(&pdev->dev, "could not read type\n");
> > + goto fail;
> > + }
> > +
> > + ret = qpnp_tm_read(chip, QPNP_TM_REG_SUBTYPE, &subtype);
> > + if (ret < 0) {
> > + dev_err(&pdev->dev, "could not read subtype\n");
> > + goto fail;
> > + }
> > +
> > + if (type != QPNP_TM_TYPE || subtype != QPNP_TM_SUBTYPE) {
> > + dev_err(&pdev->dev, "invalid type 0x%02x or subtype 0x%02x\n",
> > + type, subtype);
> > + ret = -ENODEV;
> > + goto fail;
> > + }
> > +
> > + ret = qpnp_tm_init(chip);
> > + if (ret < 0) {
> > + dev_err(&pdev->dev, "init failed\n");
> > + goto fail;
> > + }
> > +
> > + chip->tz_dev = thermal_zone_of_sensor_register(&pdev->dev, 0, chip,
> > + &qpnp_tm_sensor_ops);
> > + if (IS_ERR(chip->tz_dev)) {
> > + dev_err(&pdev->dev, "failed to register sensor\n");
> > + ret = PTR_ERR(chip->tz_dev);
> > + goto fail;
> > + }
> > +
> > + ret = devm_request_threaded_irq(&pdev->dev, irq, NULL, qpnp_tm_isr,
> > + IRQF_ONESHOT, node->name, chip);
>
> What if we request this IRQ before registering the of thermal zone
> sensor? I believe it makes more sense conceptually, as you mean, you
> register into upper layers once your driver is fully ready to do so.
>
> Any objections changing the order?
Sure.
>
> > + if (ret < 0)
> > + goto unreg;
> > +
> > + return 0;
> > +
> > +unreg:
> > + thermal_zone_of_sensor_unregister(&pdev->dev, chip->tz_dev);
>
> As mentioned by Stanimir Varban, you may also remove the above, since
> the irq is devm.
Sure. s/Varban/Varbanov/ ;-)
Thank you.
Ivan
--
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