| 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: <be0170d7-64dc-896d-b847-5be192304791@linaro.org>
Date: Sun, 28 Apr 2019 14:45:28 +0200
From: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>
To: Elaine Zhang <zhangqing@...k-chips.com>, heiko@...ech.de
Cc: rui.zhang@...el.com, edubezval@...il.com, robh+dt@...nel.org,
mark.rutland@....com, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-rockchip@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
xxx@...k-chips.com, xf@...k-chips.com, huangtao@...k-chips.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] thermal: rockchip: fix up the tsadc pinctrl
setting error
On 25/04/2019 12:12, Elaine Zhang wrote:
> Explicitly use the pinctrl to set/unset the right mode
> instead of relying on the pinctrl init mode.
> And it requires setting the tshut polarity before select pinctrl.
>
> When the temperature sensor mode is set to 0, it will automatically
> reset the board via the Clock-Reset-Unit (CRU) if the over temperature
> threshold is reached. However, when the pinctrl initializes, it does a
> transition to "otp_out" which may lead the SoC restart all the time.
>
> "otp_out" IO may be connected to the RESET circuit on the hardware.
> If the IO is in the wrong state, it will trigger RESET.
> (similar to the effect of pressing the RESET button)
> which will cause the soc to restart all the time.
>
> Signed-off-by: Elaine Zhang <zhangqing@...k-chips.com>
> ---
> drivers/thermal/rockchip_thermal.c | 37 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
> 1 file changed, 34 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/thermal/rockchip_thermal.c b/drivers/thermal/rockchip_thermal.c
> index 9c7643d62ed7..03ff494f2864 100644
> --- a/drivers/thermal/rockchip_thermal.c
> +++ b/drivers/thermal/rockchip_thermal.c
> @@ -172,6 +172,9 @@ struct rockchip_thermal_data {
> int tshut_temp;
> enum tshut_mode tshut_mode;
> enum tshut_polarity tshut_polarity;
> + struct pinctrl *pinctrl;
> + struct pinctrl_state *gpio_state;
> + struct pinctrl_state *otp_state;
> };
>
> /**
> @@ -1242,6 +1245,8 @@ static int rockchip_thermal_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> return error;
> }
>
> + thermal->chip->control(thermal->regs, false);
> +
> error = clk_prepare_enable(thermal->clk);
> if (error) {
> dev_err(&pdev->dev, "failed to enable converter clock: %d\n",
> @@ -1267,6 +1272,31 @@ static int rockchip_thermal_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> thermal->chip->initialize(thermal->grf, thermal->regs,
> thermal->tshut_polarity);
>
> + if (thermal->tshut_mode == TSHUT_MODE_GPIO) {
> + thermal->pinctrl = devm_pinctrl_get(&pdev->dev);
> + if (IS_ERR(thermal->pinctrl)) {
> + dev_err(&pdev->dev, "failed to find thermal pinctrl\n");
> + panic("panic_on_find thermal pinctrl...\n");
I realize my comment was confusing. I was not saying to add a panic()
call here but that the code was accessing a NULL pointer. Please remove
the panic.
> + return PTR_ERR(thermal->pinctrl);
> + }
> +
> + thermal->gpio_state = pinctrl_lookup_state(thermal->pinctrl,
> + "gpio");
> + if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(thermal->gpio_state)) {
> + dev_err(&pdev->dev, "failed to find thermal gpio state\n");
> + return -EINVAL;
> + }
> +
> + thermal->otp_state = pinctrl_lookup_state(thermal->pinctrl,
> + "otpout");
> + if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(thermal->otp_state)) {
> + dev_err(&pdev->dev, "failed to find thermal otpout state\n");
> + return -EINVAL;
> + }
> +
> + pinctrl_select_state(thermal->pinctrl, thermal->otp_state);
I don't understand this portion of code. The test above says tshut_mode
is TSHUT_MODE_GPIO. Why acting on thermal->otp_state then ?
In my previous comment, I was suggesting the following:
Two more fields instead of three:
struct rockchip_thermal_data {
int tshut_temp;
enum tshut_mode tshut_mode;
enum tshut_polarity tshut_polarity;
struct pinctrl *pinctrl;
struct pinctrl_state *pinctrl_state;
};
[ ... ]
thermal->pinctrl = devm_pinctrl_get(&pdev->dev);
if (IS_ERR(thermal->pinctrl)) {
dev_err("...");
return PTR_ERR(thermal->pinctrl);
}
thermal->pinctrl_state = pinctrl_lookup_state(thermal->pinctrl,
thermal->tshut_mode == TSHUT_MODE_GPIO ? "gpio" :
"otpout";
if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(thermal->pinctrl_state) {
dev_err("...");
return PTR_ERR(thermal->pinctrl_state);
}
pinctrl_select_state(thermal->pinctrl, thermal->pinctrl_state);
[ ... ]
Is it wrong ?
> + }
> +
> for (i = 0; i < thermal->chip->chn_num; i++) {
> error = rockchip_thermal_register_sensor(pdev, thermal,
> &thermal->sensors[i],
> @@ -1337,8 +1367,8 @@ static int __maybe_unused rockchip_thermal_suspend(struct device *dev)
>
> clk_disable(thermal->pclk);
> clk_disable(thermal->clk);
> -
> - pinctrl_pm_select_sleep_state(dev);
> + if (thermal->tshut_mode == TSHUT_MODE_GPIO)
> + pinctrl_select_state(thermal->pinctrl, thermal->gpio_state);
And then:
pinctrl_select_state(thermal->pinctrl, thermal->pinctrl_state);
>
> return 0;
> }
> @@ -1383,7 +1413,8 @@ static int __maybe_unused rockchip_thermal_resume(struct device *dev)
> for (i = 0; i < thermal->chip->chn_num; i++)
> rockchip_thermal_toggle_sensor(&thermal->sensors[i], true);
>
> - pinctrl_pm_select_default_state(dev);
> + if (thermal->tshut_mode == TSHUT_MODE_GPIO)
> + pinctrl_select_state(thermal->pinctrl, thermal->otp_state);
And then
pinctrl_select_state(thermal->pinctrl, thermal->pinctrl_state);
> return 0;
> }
>
--
<http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro> Facebook |
<http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg> Twitter |
<http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog/> Blog
Powered by blists - more mailing lists