| 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
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2017 18:04:15 +0200
From: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>
To: Liam Breck <liam@...workimprov.net>
Cc: Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>,
Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,
Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@...ux.intel.com>,
Sebastian Reichel <sre@...nel.org>,
Darren Hart <dvhart@...radead.org>,
Andy Shevchenko <andy@...radead.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>, linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org,
linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
devel@...verdev.osuosl.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 11/14] power: supply: bq24190_charger: Get
input_current_limit from our supplier
Hi,
On 16-08-17 22:28, Liam Breck wrote:
> Hi Hans,
>
> On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 1:04 PM, Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com> wrote:
>> On some devices the USB Type-C port power (USB PD 2.0) negotiation is
>> done by a separate port-controller IC, while the current limit is
>> controlled through another (charger) IC.
>>
>> It has been decided to model this by modelling the external Type-C
>> power brick (adapter/charger) as a power-supply class device which
>> supplies the charger-IC, with its voltage-now and current-max representing
>> the negotiated voltage and max current draw.
>>
>> This commit adds support for this to the bq24190_charger driver by calling
>> power_supply_set_input_current_limit_from_supplier helper if the
>> "input-current-limit-from-supplier" device-property is set.
>>
>> Note this replaces the functionality to get the current-limit from an
>> extcon device, which will be removed in a follow-up commit.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>
>> ---
>> Changes in v2:
>> -Wait a bit before applying current-max from our supplier as input-current-limit
>> the bq24190 may still be in its power-good wait-state while our supplier is
>> done negotating current-max and if we apply the limit to early then the
>> input-current-limit will be reset to 0.5A by the bq24190 after its
>> power-good wait is done.
>> ---
>> drivers/power/supply/bq24190_charger.c | 35 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> 1 file changed, 35 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/power/supply/bq24190_charger.c b/drivers/power/supply/bq24190_charger.c
>> index f13f892..6f75c8e 100644
>> --- a/drivers/power/supply/bq24190_charger.c
>> +++ b/drivers/power/supply/bq24190_charger.c
>> @@ -159,9 +159,11 @@ struct bq24190_dev_info {
>> struct extcon_dev *extcon;
>> struct notifier_block extcon_nb;
>> struct delayed_work extcon_work;
>> + struct delayed_work input_current_limit_work;
>> char model_name[I2C_NAME_SIZE];
>> bool initialized;
>> bool irq_event;
>> + bool input_current_limit_from_supplier;
>> struct mutex f_reg_lock;
>> u8 f_reg;
>> u8 ss_reg;
>> @@ -1142,6 +1144,32 @@ static int bq24190_charger_property_is_writeable(struct power_supply *psy,
>> return ret;
>> }
>>
>> +static void bq24190_input_current_limit_work(struct work_struct *work)
>> +{
>> + struct bq24190_dev_info *bdi =
>> + container_of(work, struct bq24190_dev_info,
>> + input_current_limit_work.work);
>> +
>> + power_supply_set_input_current_limit_from_supplier(bdi->charger);
>> +}
>> +
>> +static void bq24190_charger_external_power_changed(struct power_supply *psy)
>> +{
>> + struct bq24190_dev_info *bdi = power_supply_get_drvdata(psy);
>> +
>> + /*
>> + * The Power-Good detection may take up to 220ms, sometimes
>> + * the external charger detection is quicker, and the bq24190 will
>> + * reset to iinlim based on its own charger detection (which is not
>> + * hooked up when using external charger detection) resulting in a
>> + * too low default 500mA iinlim. Delay setting the input-current-limit
>> + * for 300ms to avoid this.
>> + */
>> + if (bdi->input_current_limit_from_supplier)
>> + queue_delayed_work(system_wq, &bdi->input_current_limit_work,
>> + msecs_to_jiffies(300));
>> +}
>> +
>> static enum power_supply_property bq24190_charger_properties[] = {
>> POWER_SUPPLY_PROP_CHARGE_TYPE,
>> POWER_SUPPLY_PROP_HEALTH,
>> @@ -1170,6 +1198,7 @@ static const struct power_supply_desc bq24190_charger_desc = {
>> .get_property = bq24190_charger_get_property,
>> .set_property = bq24190_charger_set_property,
>> .property_is_writeable = bq24190_charger_property_is_writeable,
>> + .external_power_changed = bq24190_charger_external_power_changed,
>> };
>>
>> /* Battery power supply property routines */
>> @@ -1651,6 +1680,8 @@ static int bq24190_probe(struct i2c_client *client,
>> mutex_init(&bdi->f_reg_lock);
>> bdi->f_reg = 0;
>> bdi->ss_reg = BQ24190_REG_SS_VBUS_STAT_MASK; /* impossible state */
>> + INIT_DELAYED_WORK(&bdi->input_current_limit_work,
>> + bq24190_input_current_limit_work);
>>
>> i2c_set_clientdata(client, bdi);
>>
>> @@ -1659,6 +1690,10 @@ static int bq24190_probe(struct i2c_client *client,
>> return -EINVAL;
>> }
>>
>> + bdi->input_current_limit_from_supplier =
>> + device_property_read_bool(dev,
>> + "input-current-limit-from-supplier");
>> +
>
> Maybe
> if (device_property_read_bool(dev,
> "linux,input-current-limit-from-supplier")) {
> INIT_DELAYED_WORK(&bdi->input_current_limit_work,
> bq24190_input_current_limit_work);
> bdi->input_current_limit_from_supplier = true; // or use a field
> in bdi->input_current_limit_work as the flag?
> }
Done, except for making the flag a field in input_current_limit_work,
input_current_limit_work is of type struct delayed_work so I cannot just
add a field.
> Also should document property for DT use assuming Sebastian is ok with
> new power_supply method.
Also done for v3 of this patch.
> And can you rebase to my pending series in next pass? There's nothing
> controversial in it :-)
I've cherry-picked v3 of the patch adding the dt-binding-doc to my tree so
that I could add the documentation for the property on top. I will make sure
to rebase on top of the rest once the rest is merged by Sebastian (otherwise
I need to rebase after each revision of the patch-set).
Regards,
Hans
Powered by blists - more mailing lists