| 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: <2916e43d33fd13c88d983d7e8451a41ec3bf9e31.camel@fi.rohmeurope.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2020 08:28:28 +0000
From: "Vaittinen, Matti" <Matti.Vaittinen@...rohmeurope.com>
To: "marek.vasut+renesas@...il.com" <marek.vasut+renesas@...il.com>,
"yoshihiro.shimoda.uh@...esas.com" <yoshihiro.shimoda.uh@...esas.com>,
"lee.jones@...aro.org" <lee.jones@...aro.org>
CC: "khiem.nguyen.xt@...esas.com" <khiem.nguyen.xt@...esas.com>,
"linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org"
<linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] mfd: bd9571mwv: Add support for BD9574MWF
On Tue, 2020-12-08 at 17:04 +0900, Yoshihiro Shimoda wrote:
> From: Khiem Nguyen <khiem.nguyen.xt@...esas.com>
>
> The new PMIC BD9574MWF inherits features from BD9571MWV.
> Add the support of new PMIC to existing bd9571mwv driver.
>
> Signed-off-by: Khiem Nguyen <khiem.nguyen.xt@...esas.com>
> [shimoda: rebase and refactor]
> Signed-off-by: Yoshihiro Shimoda <yoshihiro.shimoda.uh@...esas.com>
> ---
> drivers/mfd/bd9571mwv.c | 92
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> include/linux/mfd/bd9571mwv.h | 80
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 2 files changed, 172 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/mfd/bd9571mwv.c b/drivers/mfd/bd9571mwv.c
> index 57bdb6a..f8f0a87 100644
> --- a/drivers/mfd/bd9571mwv.c
> +++ b/drivers/mfd/bd9571mwv.c
> @@ -20,6 +20,7 @@ static const struct mfd_cell bd9571mwv_cells[] = {
> { .name = "bd9571mwv-gpio", },
> };
>
> +/* Regmap for BD9571MWV */
> static const struct regmap_range bd9571mwv_readable_yes_ranges[] = {
> regmap_reg_range(BD9571MWV_VENDOR_CODE,
> BD9571MWV_PRODUCT_REVISION),
> regmap_reg_range(BD9571MWV_BKUP_MODE_CNT,
> BD9571MWV_BKUP_MODE_CNT),
> @@ -112,6 +113,95 @@ static const struct bd957x_data bd9571mwv_data =
> {
> .num_cells = ARRAY_SIZE(bd9571mwv_cells),
> };
>
> +static const struct mfd_cell bd9574mwf_cells[] = {
> + { .name = "bd9571mwv-gpio", },
Another 'nit' suggestion which you can ignore if it does not make sense
:)
Are the GPIO blocks 100% identical? If not, then I would suggest
changing this to:
{ .name = "bd9574mwf-gpio", },
and populating the platform_driver id_table for sub driver(s) using
something like:
static const struct platform_device_id bd957x_gpio_id[] = {
{ "bd9571mwv-gpio", ROHM_CHIP_TYPE_BD9571 },
{ "bd9574mwf-gpio", ROHM_CHIP_TYPE_BD9574 },
{ },
};
Then you can get the IC type using
platform_get_device_id(pdev)->driver_data.
Next, I think the parent data from MFD is only used to get the regmap
and dev in sub-devices, right? Maybe you could simplify this and get
rid of the whole MFD parent data structure? I think you can use
pdev->dev.parent to get the parent device and
dev_get_regmap(pdev->dev.parent, NULL);
to get the regmap?
(After this I wonder if you need the
struct bd9571mwv at all?)
> +};
> +
> +/* Regmap for BD9574MWF */
> +static const struct regmap_range bd9574mwf_readable_yes_ranges[] = {
> + regmap_reg_range(BD9574MWF_VENDOR_CODE,
> BD9574MWF_PRODUCT_REVISION),
> + regmap_reg_range(BD9574MWF_GPIO_IN, BD9574MWF_GPIO_IN),
> + regmap_reg_range(BD9574MWF_GPIO_INT, BD9574MWF_GPIO_INTMASK),
> + regmap_reg_range(BD9574MWF_GPIO_MUX, BD9574MWF_GPIO_MUX),
> + regmap_reg_range(BD9574MWF_INT_INTREQ, BD9574MWF_INT_INTMASK),
> +};
> +
> +static const struct regmap_access_table bd9574mwf_readable_table = {
> + .yes_ranges = bd9574mwf_readable_yes_ranges,
> + .n_yes_ranges = ARRAY_SIZE(bd9574mwf_readable_yes_ranges),
> +};
> +
> +static const struct regmap_range bd9574mwf_writable_yes_ranges[] = {
> + regmap_reg_range(BD9574MWF_GPIO_DIR, BD9574MWF_GPIO_OUT),
> + regmap_reg_range(BD9574MWF_GPIO_INT_SET,
> BD9574MWF_GPIO_INTMASK),
> + regmap_reg_range(BD9574MWF_INT_INTREQ, BD9574MWF_INT_INTMASK),
> +};
> +
> +static const struct regmap_access_table bd9574mwf_writable_table = {
> + .yes_ranges = bd9574mwf_writable_yes_ranges,
> + .n_yes_ranges = ARRAY_SIZE(bd9574mwf_writable_yes_ranges),
> +};
> +
> +static const struct regmap_range bd9574mwf_volatile_yes_ranges[] = {
> + regmap_reg_range(BD9574MWF_GPIO_IN, BD9574MWF_GPIO_IN),
> + regmap_reg_range(BD9574MWF_GPIO_INT, BD9574MWF_GPIO_INT),
> + regmap_reg_range(BD9574MWF_INT_INTREQ, BD9574MWF_INT_INTREQ),
> +};
Are you using the other interrupts/statuses or VDCORE MoniVDAC? Should
they be volatile too?
> +
> +static const struct regmap_access_table bd9574mwf_volatile_table = {
> + .yes_ranges = bd9574mwf_volatile_yes_ranges,
> + .n_yes_ranges = ARRAY_SIZE(bd9574mwf_volatile_yes_ranges),
> +};
> +
> +static const struct regmap_config bd9574mwf_regmap_config = {
> + .reg_bits = 8,
> + .val_bits = 8,
> + .cache_type = REGCACHE_RBTREE,
> + .rd_table = &bd9574mwf_readable_table,
> + .wr_table = &bd9574mwf_writable_table,
> + .volatile_table = &bd9574mwf_volatile_table,
> + .max_register = 0xff,
> +};
> +
> +static const struct regmap_irq bd9574mwf_irqs[] = {
> + REGMAP_IRQ_REG(BD9574MWF_IRQ_MD1, 0,
> + BD9574MWF_INT_INTREQ_MD1_INT),
> + REGMAP_IRQ_REG(BD9574MWF_IRQ_MD2_E1, 0,
> + BD9574MWF_INT_INTREQ_MD2_E1_INT),
> + REGMAP_IRQ_REG(BD9574MWF_IRQ_MD2_E2, 0,
> + BD9574MWF_INT_INTREQ_MD2_E2_INT),
> + REGMAP_IRQ_REG(BD9574MWF_IRQ_PROT_ERR, 0,
> + BD9574MWF_INT_INTREQ_PROT_ERR_INT),
> + REGMAP_IRQ_REG(BD9574MWF_IRQ_GP, 0,
> + BD9574MWF_INT_INTREQ_GP_INT),
> + REGMAP_IRQ_REG(BD9574MWF_IRQ_BKUP_HOLD_OF, 0,
> + BD9574MWF_INT_INTREQ_BKUP_HOLD_OF_INT),
> + REGMAP_IRQ_REG(BD9574MWF_IRQ_WDT_OF, 0,
> + BD9574MWF_INT_INTREQ_WDT_OF_INT),
> + REGMAP_IRQ_REG(BD9574MWF_IRQ_BKUP_TRG, 0,
> + BD9574MWF_INT_INTREQ_BKUP_TRG_INT),
> +};
> +
> +static struct regmap_irq_chip bd9574mwf_irq_chip = {
> + .name = "bd9574mwf",
> + .status_base = BD9574MWF_INT_INTREQ,
> + .mask_base = BD9574MWF_INT_INTMASK,
> + .ack_base = BD9574MWF_INT_INTREQ,
> + .init_ack_masked = true,
> + .num_regs = 1,
> + .irqs = bd9574mwf_irqs,
> + .num_irqs = ARRAY_SIZE(bd9574mwf_irqs),
> +};
> +
> +static const struct bd957x_data bd9574mwf_data = {
> + .product_code_val = BD9574MWF_PRODUCT_CODE_VAL,
> + .part_number = BD9574MWF_PART_NUMBER,
> + .regmap_config = &bd9574mwf_regmap_config,
> + .irq_chip = &bd9574mwf_irq_chip,
> + .cells = bd9574mwf_cells,
> + .num_cells = ARRAY_SIZE(bd9574mwf_cells),
> +};
> +
> static int bd9571mwv_identify(struct bd9571mwv *bd)
> {
> struct device *dev = bd->dev;
> @@ -182,6 +272,8 @@ static int bd9571mwv_probe(struct i2c_client
> *client,
> product_code = (unsigned int)ret;
> if (product_code == BD9571MWV_PRODUCT_CODE_VAL)
> bd->data = &bd9571mwv_data;
> + else if (product_code == BD9574MWF_PRODUCT_CODE_VAL)
> + bd->data = &bd9574mwf_data;
>
> if (!bd->data) {
> dev_err(bd->dev, "No found supported device %d\n",
> diff --git a/include/linux/mfd/bd9571mwv.h
> b/include/linux/mfd/bd9571mwv.h
> index 0126b52..e9e219b 100644
> --- a/include/linux/mfd/bd9571mwv.h
> +++ b/include/linux/mfd/bd9571mwv.h
> @@ -99,6 +99,86 @@ enum bd9571mwv_irqs {
> BD9571MWV_IRQ_BKUP_TRG,
> };
>
> +/* List of registers for BD9574MWF */
> +#define BD9574MWF_VENDOR_CODE 0x00
> +#define BD9574MWF_VENDOR_CODE_VAL 0xdb
> +#define BD9574MWF_PRODUCT_CODE 0x01
> +#define BD9574MWF_PRODUCT_CODE_VAL 0x74
> +#define BD9574MWF_PRODUCT_REVISION 0x02
> +
> +#define BD9574MWF_I2C_FUSA_MODE 0x10
> +#define BD9574MWF_I2C_MD2_E1_BIT_1 0x11
> +#define BD9574MWF_I2C_MD2_E1_BIT_2 0x12
> +
> +#define BD9574MWF_BKUP_MODE_CNT 0x20
> +#define BD9574MWF_BKUP_MODE_STATUS 0x21
> +#define BD9574MWF_BKUP_RECOVERY_CNT 0x22
> +#define BD9574MWF_BKUP_CTRL_TIM_CNT 0x23
> +#define BD9574MWF_WAITBKUP_WDT_CNT 0x24
> +#define BD9574MWF_BKUP_HOLD_TIM_CNT1 0x26
> +#define BD9574MWF_QLLM_CNT 0x27
> +#define BD9574MWF_BKUP_HOLD_TIM_CNT2 0x28
> +
> +#define BD9574MWF_DCDC_FREQ 0x48
> +
> +#define BD9574MWF_VDCORE_VINIT 0x50
> +#define BD9574MWF_VD09_VINIT 0x51
> +#define BD9574MWF_VDCORE_SETVMAX 0x52
> +#define BD9574MWF_VDCORE_SETVID 0x54
> +#define BD9574MWF_VDCORE_MONIVDAC 0x55
> +#define BD9574MWF_VDCORE_PGD_CNT 0x56
> +
> +#define BD9574MWF_GPIO_DIR 0x60
> +#define BD9574MWF_GPIO_OUT 0x61
> +#define BD9574MWF_GPIO_IN 0x62
> +#define BD9574MWF_GPIO_DEB 0x63
> +#define BD9574MWF_GPIO_INT_SET 0x64
> +#define BD9574MWF_GPIO_INT 0x65
> +#define BD9574MWF_GPIO_INTMASK 0x66
> +#define BD9574MWF_GPIO_MUX 0x67
> +
> +#define BD9574MWF_REG_KEEP(n) (0x70 + (n))
> +
> +#define BD9574MWF_PMIC_INTERNAL_STATUS 0x80
> +#define BD9574MWF_PROT_ERROR_STATUS0 0x81
> +#define BD9574MWF_PROT_ERROR_STATUS1 0x82
> +#define BD9574MWF_PROT_ERROR_STATUS2 0x83
> +#define BD9574MWF_PROT_ERROR_STATUS3 0x84
> +#define BD9574MWF_PROT_ERROR_STATUS4 0x85
> +#define BD9574MWF_PROT_ERROR_STATUS5 0x86
> +#define BD9574MWF_SYS_ERROR_STATUS 0x87
> +
> +#define BD9574MWF_INT_INTREQ 0x90
> +#define BD9574MWF_INT_INTREQ_MD1_INT BIT(0)
> +#define BD9574MWF_INT_INTREQ_MD2_E1_INT BIT(1)
> +#define BD9574MWF_INT_INTREQ_MD2_E2_INT BIT(2)
> +#define BD9574MWF_INT_INTREQ_PROT_ERR_INT BIT(3)
> +#define BD9574MWF_INT_INTREQ_GP_INT BIT(4)
> +#define BD9574MWF_INT_INTREQ_BKUP_HOLD_OF_INT BIT(5)
> +#define BD9574MWF_INT_INTREQ_WDT_OF_INT BIT(6)
> +#define BD9574MWF_INT_INTREQ_BKUP_TRG_INT BIT(7)
> +#define BD9574MWF_INT_INTMASK 0x91
> +
> +#define BD9574MWF_SSCG_CNT 0xA0
> +#define BD9574MWF_POFFB_MRB 0xA1
> +#define BD9574MWF_SMRB_WR_PROT 0xA2
> +#define BD9574MWF_SMRB_ASSERT 0xA3
> +#define BD9574MWF_SMRB_STATUS 0xA4
> +
> +#define BD9574MWF_PART_NUMBER "BD9574MWF"
> +
> +/* Define the BD9574MWF IRQ numbers */
> +enum bd9574mwf_irqs {
> + BD9574MWF_IRQ_MD1,
> + BD9574MWF_IRQ_MD2_E1,
> + BD9574MWF_IRQ_MD2_E2,
> + BD9574MWF_IRQ_PROT_ERR,
> + BD9574MWF_IRQ_GP,
> + BD9574MWF_IRQ_BKUP_HOLD_OF,
> + BD9574MWF_IRQ_WDT_OF,
> + BD9574MWF_IRQ_BKUP_TRG,
> +};
> +
> /**
> * struct bd957x_data - internal data for the bd957x driver
> *
Overall a good looking driver! Thanks a lot!
Best Regards
Matti
--
Matti Vaittinen, Linux device drivers
ROHM Semiconductors, Finland SWDC
Kiviharjunlenkki 1E
90220 OULU
FINLAND
~~~ "I don't think so," said Rene Descartes. Just then he vanished ~~~
Simon says - in Latin please.
"non cogito me" dixit Rene Descarte, deinde evanescavit
(Thanks for the translation Simon)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists