| 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: Tue, 31 Mar 2020 15:36:43 +0800
From: Nicolas Boichat <drinkcat@...omium.org>
To: Hsin-Hsiung Wang <hsin-hsiung.wang@...iatek.com>
Cc: Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>, Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>,
Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Sean Wang <sean.wang@...iatek.com>,
Sebastian Reichel <sre@...nel.org>,
Eddie Huang <eddie.huang@...iatek.com>,
Alessandro Zummo <a.zummo@...ertech.it>,
Kate Stewart <kstewart@...uxfoundation.org>,
Richard Fontana <rfontana@...hat.com>,
Frank Wunderlich <frank-w@...lic-files.de>,
Josef Friedl <josef.friedl@...ed.at>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ran Bi <ran.bi@...iatek.com>,
Devicetree List <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-arm Mailing List <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
"moderated list:ARM/Mediatek SoC support"
<linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org>,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"open list:THERMAL" <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-rtc@...r.kernel.org,
srv_heupstream <srv_heupstream@...iatek.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 3/5] mfd: Add support for the MediaTek MT6358 PMIC
On Tue, Mar 31, 2020 at 12:07 PM Hsin-Hsiung Wang
<hsin-hsiung.wang@...iatek.com> wrote:
>
> This adds support for the MediaTek MT6358 PMIC. This is a
> multifunction device with the following sub modules:
>
> - Regulator
> - RTC
> - Codec
> - Interrupt
>
> It is interfaced to the host controller using SPI interface
> by a proprietary hardware called PMIC wrapper or pwrap.
> MT6358 MFD is a child device of the pwrap.
>
> Signed-off-by: Hsin-Hsiung Wang <hsin-hsiung.wang@...iatek.com>
> Reviewed-by: Nicolas Boichat <drinkcat@...omium.org>
This is missing a few comments from Lee Jones on v10, actually, repeated below:
https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11431239/#23244041
> ---
> drivers/mfd/Makefile | 2 +-
> drivers/mfd/mt6358-irq.c | 236 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> drivers/mfd/mt6397-core.c | 55 ++++++-
> include/linux/mfd/mt6358/core.h | 158 ++++++++++++++++++++
> include/linux/mfd/mt6358/registers.h | 282 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> include/linux/mfd/mt6397/core.h | 3 +
> 6 files changed, 731 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> create mode 100644 drivers/mfd/mt6358-irq.c
> create mode 100644 include/linux/mfd/mt6358/core.h
> create mode 100644 include/linux/mfd/mt6358/registers.h
>
> diff --git a/drivers/mfd/Makefile b/drivers/mfd/Makefile
> index b83f172..9af1414 100644
> --- a/drivers/mfd/Makefile
> +++ b/drivers/mfd/Makefile
> @@ -238,7 +238,7 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_INTEL_SOC_PMIC) += intel-soc-pmic.o
> obj-$(CONFIG_INTEL_SOC_PMIC_BXTWC) += intel_soc_pmic_bxtwc.o
> obj-$(CONFIG_INTEL_SOC_PMIC_CHTWC) += intel_soc_pmic_chtwc.o
> obj-$(CONFIG_INTEL_SOC_PMIC_CHTDC_TI) += intel_soc_pmic_chtdc_ti.o
> -mt6397-objs := mt6397-core.o mt6397-irq.o
> +mt6397-objs := mt6397-core.o mt6397-irq.o mt6358-irq.o
> obj-$(CONFIG_MFD_MT6397) += mt6397.o
> obj-$(CONFIG_INTEL_SOC_PMIC_MRFLD) += intel_soc_pmic_mrfld.o
>
> diff --git a/drivers/mfd/mt6358-irq.c b/drivers/mfd/mt6358-irq.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..022e5f5
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/drivers/mfd/mt6358-irq.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,236 @@
> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> +//
> +// Copyright (c) 2019 MediaTek Inc.
2020
> +
> +#include <linux/interrupt.h>
> +#include <linux/mfd/mt6358/core.h>
> +#include <linux/mfd/mt6358/registers.h>
> +#include <linux/mfd/mt6397/core.h>
> +#include <linux/module.h>
> +#include <linux/of.h>
> +#include <linux/of_device.h>
> +#include <linux/of_irq.h>
> +#include <linux/platform_device.h>
> +#include <linux/regmap.h>
> +
> +static struct irq_top_t mt6358_ints[] = {
> + MT6358_TOP_GEN(BUCK),
> + MT6358_TOP_GEN(LDO),
> + MT6358_TOP_GEN(PSC),
> + MT6358_TOP_GEN(SCK),
> + MT6358_TOP_GEN(BM),
> + MT6358_TOP_GEN(HK),
> + MT6358_TOP_GEN(AUD),
> + MT6358_TOP_GEN(MISC),
> +};
> +
> +static void pmic_irq_enable(struct irq_data *data)
> +{
> + unsigned int hwirq = irqd_to_hwirq(data);
> + struct mt6397_chip *chip = irq_data_get_irq_chip_data(data);
> + struct pmic_irq_data *irqd = chip->irq_data;
> +
> + irqd->enable_hwirq[hwirq] = true;
> +}
> +
> +static void pmic_irq_disable(struct irq_data *data)
> +{
> + unsigned int hwirq = irqd_to_hwirq(data);
> + struct mt6397_chip *chip = irq_data_get_irq_chip_data(data);
> + struct pmic_irq_data *irqd = chip->irq_data;
> +
> + irqd->enable_hwirq[hwirq] = false;
> +}
> +
> +static void pmic_irq_lock(struct irq_data *data)
> +{
> + struct mt6397_chip *chip = irq_data_get_irq_chip_data(data);
> +
> + mutex_lock(&chip->irqlock);
> +}
> +
> +static void pmic_irq_sync_unlock(struct irq_data *data)
> +{
> + unsigned int i, top_gp, gp_offset, en_reg, int_regs, shift;
> + struct mt6397_chip *chip = irq_data_get_irq_chip_data(data);
> + struct pmic_irq_data *irqd = chip->irq_data;
> +
> + for (i = 0; i < irqd->num_pmic_irqs; i++) {
> + if (irqd->enable_hwirq[i] == irqd->cache_hwirq[i])
> + continue;
> +
> + /* Find out the IRQ group */
> + top_gp = 0;
> + while ((top_gp + 1) < irqd->num_top &&
> + i >= mt6358_ints[top_gp + 1].hwirq_base)
> + top_gp++;
> +
> + /* Find the irq registers */
>From Lee Jones: 'Nit: "IRQ"'
> + gp_offset = i - mt6358_ints[top_gp].hwirq_base;
> + int_regs = gp_offset / MT6358_REG_WIDTH;
> + shift = gp_offset % MT6358_REG_WIDTH;
> + en_reg = mt6358_ints[top_gp].en_reg +
> + (mt6358_ints[top_gp].en_reg_shift * int_regs);
> +
[...]
> +static const struct irq_domain_ops mt6358_irq_domain_ops = {
> + .map = pmic_irq_domain_map,
> + .xlate = irq_domain_xlate_twocell,
> +};
> +
> +int mt6358_irq_init(struct mt6397_chip *chip)
> +{
> + int i, j, ret;
> + struct pmic_irq_data *irqd;
> +
> + irqd = devm_kzalloc(chip->dev, sizeof(struct pmic_irq_data *),
>From Lee Jones: 'sizeof(*irqd)'
> + GFP_KERNEL);
> + if (!irqd)
> + return -ENOMEM;
> +
> + chip->irq_data = irqd;
> +
[...]
> @@ -154,19 +184,33 @@ static int mt6397_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> if (pmic->irq <= 0)
> return pmic->irq;
>
> - ret = mt6397_irq_init(pmic);
> - if (ret)
> - return ret;
> -
> switch (pmic->chip_id) {
> case MT6323_CHIP_ID:
> + ret = mt6397_irq_init(pmic);
> + if (ret)
> + return ret;
> +
> ret = devm_mfd_add_devices(&pdev->dev, PLATFORM_DEVID_NONE,
> mt6323_devs, ARRAY_SIZE(mt6323_devs),
> NULL, 0, pmic->irq_domain);
> break;
>
> + case MT6358_CHIP_ID:
> + ret = mt6358_irq_init(pmic);
> + if (ret)
> + return ret;
> +
> + ret = devm_mfd_add_devices(&pdev->dev, PLATFORM_DEVID_NONE,
> + mt6358_devs, ARRAY_SIZE(mt6358_devs),
> + NULL, 0, pmic->irq_domain);
> + break;
>From Lee Jones: "In a subsequent patch you can choose the correct
mtXXXX_devs structure to pass and call devm_mfd_add_devices() only
once below the switch()."
Can you look into that as a follow-up patch?
> +
> case MT6391_CHIP_ID:
> case MT6397_CHIP_ID:
> + ret = mt6397_irq_init(pmic);
> + if (ret)
> + return ret;
> +
> ret = devm_mfd_add_devices(&pdev->dev, PLATFORM_DEVID_NONE,
> mt6397_devs, ARRAY_SIZE(mt6397_devs),
> NULL, 0, pmic->irq_domain);
[snip]
Powered by blists - more mailing lists