| 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: <1c178228-2b83-e319-129f-4524b5a1bc8b@quicinc.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2023 14:49:06 +0530
From: Praveenkumar I <quic_ipkumar@...cinc.com>
To: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org>
CC: <agross@...nel.org>, <andersson@...nel.org>,
<konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>, <amitk@...nel.org>,
<thara.gopinath@...il.com>, <rafael@...nel.org>,
<daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>, <rui.zhang@...el.com>,
<robh+dt@...nel.org>, <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
<conor+dt@...nel.org>, <linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>, <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <quic_varada@...cinc.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6] thermal/drivers/tsens: Add TSENS enable and
calibration support for V2
On 7/10/2023 8:32 PM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> On Mon, 10 Jul 2023 at 16:22, Praveenkumar I <quic_ipkumar@...cinc.com> wrote:
>>
>> On 7/10/2023 4:49 PM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
>>> On 10/07/2023 13:37, Praveenkumar I wrote:
>>>> SoCs without RPM have to enable sensors and calibrate from the kernel.
>>>> Though TSENS IP supports 16 sensors, not all are used. So added
>>>> sensors_to_en in tsens data help enable the relevant sensors.
>>>>
>>>> Added new calibration function for V2 as the tsens.c calib function
>>>> only supports V1.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Praveenkumar I <quic_ipkumar@...cinc.com>
>>>> ---
>>>> drivers/thermal/qcom/tsens-v2.c | 116 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>> drivers/thermal/qcom/tsens.c | 37 +++++++++-
>>>> drivers/thermal/qcom/tsens.h | 56 +++++++++++++++
>>>> 3 files changed, 208 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/thermal/qcom/tsens-v2.c
>>>> b/drivers/thermal/qcom/tsens-v2.c
>>>> index 29a61d2d6ca3..db48b1d95348 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/thermal/qcom/tsens-v2.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/thermal/qcom/tsens-v2.c
>>>> @@ -6,11 +6,20 @@
>>>> #include <linux/bitops.h>
>>>> #include <linux/regmap.h>
>>>> +#include <linux/nvmem-consumer.h>
>>>> #include "tsens.h"
>>>> /* ----- SROT ------ */
>>>> #define SROT_HW_VER_OFF 0x0000
>>>> #define SROT_CTRL_OFF 0x0004
>>>> +#define SROT_MEASURE_PERIOD 0x0008
>>>> +#define SROT_Sn_CONVERSION 0x0060
>>>> +#define V2_SHIFT_DEFAULT 0x0003
>>>> +#define V2_SLOPE_DEFAULT 0x0cd0
>>>> +#define V2_CZERO_DEFAULT 0x016a
>>>> +#define ONE_PT_SLOPE 0x0cd0
>>>> +#define TWO_PT_SHIFTED_GAIN 921600
>>>> +#define ONE_PT_CZERO_CONST 94
>>>> /* ----- TM ------ */
>>>> #define TM_INT_EN_OFF 0x0004
>>>> @@ -59,6 +68,16 @@ static const struct reg_field
>>>> tsens_v2_regfields[MAX_REGFIELDS] = {
>>>> /* CTRL_OFF */
>>>> [TSENS_EN] = REG_FIELD(SROT_CTRL_OFF, 0, 0),
>>>> [TSENS_SW_RST] = REG_FIELD(SROT_CTRL_OFF, 1, 1),
>>>> + [SENSOR_EN] = REG_FIELD(SROT_CTRL_OFF, 3, 18),
>>>> + [CODE_OR_TEMP] = REG_FIELD(SROT_CTRL_OFF, 21, 21),
>>>> +
>>>> + /* MAIN_MEASURE_PERIOD */
>>>> + [MAIN_MEASURE_PERIOD] = REG_FIELD(SROT_MEASURE_PERIOD, 0, 7),
>>>> +
>>>> + /* Sn Conversion */
>>>> + REG_FIELD_FOR_EACH_SENSOR16(SHIFT, SROT_Sn_CONVERSION, 23, 24),
>>>> + REG_FIELD_FOR_EACH_SENSOR16(SLOPE, SROT_Sn_CONVERSION, 10, 22),
>>>> + REG_FIELD_FOR_EACH_SENSOR16(CZERO, SROT_Sn_CONVERSION, 0, 9),
>>>> /* ----- TM ------ */
>>>> /* INTERRUPT ENABLE */
>>>> @@ -104,6 +123,103 @@ static const struct reg_field
>>>> tsens_v2_regfields[MAX_REGFIELDS] = {
>>>> [TRDY] = REG_FIELD(TM_TRDY_OFF, 0, 0),
>>>> };
>>>> +static int tsens_v2_calibration(struct tsens_priv *priv)
>>>> +{
>>>> + struct device *dev = priv->dev;
>>>> + u32 mode, base0, base1;
>>>> + u32 slope, czero;
>>>> + char name[15];
>>>> + int i, j, ret;
>>>> +
>>>> + if (priv->num_sensors > MAX_SENSORS)
>>>> + return -EINVAL;
>>>> +
>>>> + ret = nvmem_cell_read_variable_le_u32(priv->dev, "mode", &mode);
>>>> + if (ret == -ENOENT)
>>>> + dev_warn(priv->dev, "Calibration data not present in DT\n");
>>>> + if (ret < 0)
>>>> + return ret;
>>>> +
>>>> + dev_dbg(priv->dev, "calibration mode is %d\n", mode);
>>>> +
>>>> + ret = nvmem_cell_read_variable_le_u32(priv->dev, "base0", &base0);
>>>> + if (ret < 0)
>>>> + return ret;
>>>> +
>>>> + ret = nvmem_cell_read_variable_le_u32(priv->dev, "base1", &base1);
>>>> + if (ret < 0)
>>>> + return ret;
>>>> +
>>>> + /* Read offset values and allocate SHIFT, SLOPE & CZERO regmap
>>>> for enabled sensors */
>>>> + for (i = 0; i < priv->num_sensors; i++) {
>>>> + if (!(priv->sensors_to_en & (0x1 << i)))
>>>> + continue;
>>>> +
>>>> + ret = snprintf(name, sizeof(name), "s%d_offset",
>>>> priv->sensor[i].hw_id);
>>>> + if (ret < 0)
>>>> + return ret;
>>>> +
>>>> + ret = nvmem_cell_read_variable_le_u32(priv->dev, name,
>>>> &priv->sensor[i].offset);
>>>> + if (ret)
>>>> + return ret;
>>>> +
>>>> + for (j = SHIFT_0; j <= CZERO_0; j++) {
>>>> + int idx = (i * 3) + j;
>>>> +
>>>> + priv->rf[idx] = devm_regmap_field_alloc(dev,
>>>> priv->srot_map,
>>>> + priv->fields[idx]);
>>>> + if (IS_ERR(priv->rf[idx]))
>>>> + return PTR_ERR(priv->rf[idx]);
>>> I think, allocating data structures for 48 regfields, which are
>>> written just once, to be an overkill.
>> Can we change it to single field for each sensor. For example,
>> CONVERSION_0 instead of SHIFT_0, SLOPE_0 and CZERO_0? This way it will
>> be max 16 regfields.
> If you move writing of the registers to the loop, you won't need
> regfields. You can just call regmap_update_bits. The point is that you
> don't have to allocate a one-time instance.
Sure, will update in next patch.
>
>>>> + }
>>>> + }
>>>> +
>>>> + /* Based on calib mode, program SHIFT, SLOPE and CZERO for
>>>> enabled sensors */
>>>> + switch (mode) {
>>>> + case TWO_PT_CALIB:
>>>> + slope = (TWO_PT_SHIFTED_GAIN / (base1 - base0));
>>>> +
>>>> + for (i = 0; i < priv->num_sensors; i++) {
>>>> + if (!(priv->sensors_to_en & (0x1 << i)))
>>>> + continue;
>>>> +
>>>> + int idx = i * 3;
>>>> +
>>>> + czero = (base0 + priv->sensor[i].offset - ((base1 -
>>>> base0) / 3));
>>>> + regmap_field_write(priv->rf[SHIFT_0 + idx],
>>>> V2_SHIFT_DEFAULT);
>>>> + regmap_field_write(priv->rf[SLOPE_0 + idx], slope);
>>>> + regmap_field_write(priv->rf[CZERO_0 + idx], czero);
>>>> + }
>>>> + fallthrough;
>>>> + case ONE_PT_CALIB2:
>>>> + for (i = 0; i < priv->num_sensors; i++) {
>>>> + if (!(priv->sensors_to_en & (0x1 << i)))
>>>> + continue;
>>>> +
>>>> + int idx = i * 3;
>>>> +
>>>> + czero = base0 + priv->sensor[i].offset -
>>>> ONE_PT_CZERO_CONST;
>>>> + regmap_field_write(priv->rf[SHIFT_0 + idx],
>>>> V2_SHIFT_DEFAULT);
>>>> + regmap_field_write(priv->rf[SLOPE_0 + idx], ONE_PT_SLOPE);
>>>> + regmap_field_write(priv->rf[CZERO_0 + idx], czero);
>>>> + }
>>>> + break;
>>>> + default:
>>>> + dev_dbg(priv->dev, "calibrationless mode\n");
>>>> + for (i = 0; i < priv->num_sensors; i++) {
>>>> + if (!(priv->sensors_to_en & (0x1 << i)))
>>>> + continue;
>>>> +
>>>> + int idx = i * 3;
>>>> +
>>>> + regmap_field_write(priv->rf[SHIFT_0 + idx],
>>>> V2_SHIFT_DEFAULT);
>>>> + regmap_field_write(priv->rf[SLOPE_0 + idx],
>>>> V2_SLOPE_DEFAULT);
>>>> + regmap_field_write(priv->rf[CZERO_0 + idx],
>>>> V2_CZERO_DEFAULT);
>>>> + }
>>>> + }
>>> This code iterates over the sensors field several times. Please
>>> consider extracting a function that handles all setup for a single
>>> sensor, then calling it in a loop (I should probably do the same for
>>> tsens-v0/v1 too).
>> Sure. After reading the mode0, base0 and base1 from QFPROM, we can call
>> a function in a loop to setup the calibration for each sensor.
>>>> +
>>>> + return 0;
>>>> +}
>>>> +
>>>> static const struct tsens_ops ops_generic_v2 = {
>>>> .init = init_common,
>>>> .get_temp = get_temp_tsens_valid,
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/thermal/qcom/tsens.c b/drivers/thermal/qcom/tsens.c
>>>> index 98c356acfe98..169690355dad 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/thermal/qcom/tsens.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/thermal/qcom/tsens.c
>>>> @@ -974,7 +974,7 @@ int __init init_common(struct tsens_priv *priv)
>>>> ret = regmap_field_read(priv->rf[TSENS_EN], &enabled);
>>>> if (ret)
>>>> goto err_put_device;
>>>> - if (!enabled) {
>>>> + if (!enabled && !priv->sensors_to_en) {
>>>> dev_err(dev, "%s: device not enabled\n", __func__);
>>>> ret = -ENODEV;
>>>> goto err_put_device;
>>>> @@ -1006,6 +1006,40 @@ int __init init_common(struct tsens_priv *priv)
>>>> goto err_put_device;
>>>> }
>>>> + /* Do TSENS initialization if required */
>>>> + if (priv->sensors_to_en) {
>>> Maybe it would be better to explicitly add VER_2_X_NO_RPM and check it
>>> here?
>> Sure, will add a separate version macro.
>>>> + priv->rf[CODE_OR_TEMP] = devm_regmap_field_alloc(dev,
>>>> priv->srot_map,
>>>> + priv->fields[CODE_OR_TEMP]);
>>>> + if (IS_ERR(priv->rf[CODE_OR_TEMP])) {
>>>> + ret = PTR_ERR(priv->rf[CODE_OR_TEMP]);
>>>> + goto err_put_device;
>>>> + }
>>>> +
>>>> + priv->rf[MAIN_MEASURE_PERIOD] =
>>>> + devm_regmap_field_alloc(dev, priv->srot_map,
>>>> + priv->fields[MAIN_MEASURE_PERIOD]);
>>>> + if (IS_ERR(priv->rf[MAIN_MEASURE_PERIOD])) {
>>>> + ret = PTR_ERR(priv->rf[MAIN_MEASURE_PERIOD]);
>>>> + goto err_put_device;
>>>> + }
>>>> +
>>>> + regmap_field_write(priv->rf[TSENS_SW_RST], 0x1);
>>>> +
>>>> + /* Update measure period to 2ms */
>>>> + regmap_field_write(priv->rf[MAIN_MEASURE_PERIOD], 0x1);
>>>> +
>>>> + /* Enable available sensors */
>>>> + regmap_field_write(priv->rf[SENSOR_EN], priv->sensors_to_en);
>>>> +
>>>> + /* Real temperature format */
>>>> + regmap_field_write(priv->rf[CODE_OR_TEMP], 0x1);
>>>> +
>>>> + regmap_field_write(priv->rf[TSENS_SW_RST], 0x0);
>>>> +
>>>> + /* Enable TSENS */
>>>> + regmap_field_write(priv->rf[TSENS_EN], 0x1);
>>>> + }
>>>> +
>>>> /* This loop might need changes if enum regfield_ids is
>>>> reordered */
>>>> for (j = LAST_TEMP_0; j <= UP_THRESH_15; j += 16) {
>>>> for (i = 0; i < priv->feat->max_sensors; i++) {
>>>> @@ -1282,6 +1316,7 @@ static int tsens_probe(struct platform_device
>>>> *pdev)
>>>> priv->dev = dev;
>>>> priv->num_sensors = num_sensors;
>>>> + priv->sensors_to_en = data->sensors_to_en;
>>>> priv->ops = data->ops;
>>>> for (i = 0; i < priv->num_sensors; i++) {
>>>> if (data->hw_ids)
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/thermal/qcom/tsens.h b/drivers/thermal/qcom/tsens.h
>>>> index 2805de1c6827..f8897bc8944e 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/thermal/qcom/tsens.h
>>>> +++ b/drivers/thermal/qcom/tsens.h
>>>> @@ -168,6 +168,58 @@ enum regfield_ids {
>>>> TSENS_SW_RST,
>>>> SENSOR_EN,
>>>> CODE_OR_TEMP,
>>>> + /* MEASURE_PERIOD */
>>>> + MAIN_MEASURE_PERIOD,
>>>> +
>>>> + /* Sn_CONVERSION */
>>>> + SHIFT_0,
>>>> + SLOPE_0,
>>>> + CZERO_0,
>>>> + SHIFT_1,
>>>> + SLOPE_1,
>>>> + CZERO_1,
>>>> + SHIFT_2,
>>>> + SLOPE_2,
>>>> + CZERO_2,
>>>> + SHIFT_3,
>>>> + SLOPE_3,
>>>> + CZERO_3,
>>>> + SHIFT_4,
>>>> + SLOPE_4,
>>>> + CZERO_4,
>>>> + SHIFT_5,
>>>> + SLOPE_5,
>>>> + CZERO_5,
>>>> + SHIFT_6,
>>>> + SLOPE_6,
>>>> + CZERO_6,
>>>> + SHIFT_7,
>>>> + SLOPE_7,
>>>> + CZERO_7,
>>>> + SHIFT_8,
>>>> + SLOPE_8,
>>>> + CZERO_8,
>>>> + SHIFT_9,
>>>> + SLOPE_9,
>>>> + CZERO_9,
>>>> + SHIFT_10,
>>>> + SLOPE_10,
>>>> + CZERO_10,
>>>> + SHIFT_11,
>>>> + SLOPE_11,
>>>> + CZERO_11,
>>>> + SHIFT_12,
>>>> + SLOPE_12,
>>>> + CZERO_12,
>>>> + SHIFT_13,
>>>> + SLOPE_13,
>>>> + CZERO_13,
>>>> + SHIFT_14,
>>>> + SLOPE_14,
>>>> + CZERO_14,
>>>> + SHIFT_15,
>>>> + SLOPE_15,
>>>> + CZERO_15,
>>>> /* ----- TM ------ */
>>>> /* TRDY */
>>>> @@ -524,6 +576,7 @@ struct tsens_features {
>>>> /**
>>>> * struct tsens_plat_data - tsens compile-time platform data
>>>> * @num_sensors: Number of sensors supported by platform
>>>> + * @sensors_to_en: Sensors to be enabled. Each bit represent a sensor
>>>> * @ops: operations the tsens instance supports
>>>> * @hw_ids: Subset of sensors ids supported by platform, if not the
>>>> first n
>>>> * @feat: features of the IP
>>>> @@ -531,6 +584,7 @@ struct tsens_features {
>>>> */
>>>> struct tsens_plat_data {
>>>> const u32 num_sensors;
>>>> + const u16 sensors_to_en;
>>> There is already a similar field, hw_ids. Can it be used instead?
>> Yes, it can be used. I missed to check this hw_ids. Will change the
>> num_sensors to 5 and use the hw_ids.
>>>> const struct tsens_ops *ops;
>>>> unsigned int *hw_ids;
>>>> struct tsens_features *feat;
>>>> @@ -551,6 +605,7 @@ struct tsens_context {
>>>> * struct tsens_priv - private data for each instance of the tsens IP
>>>> * @dev: pointer to struct device
>>>> * @num_sensors: number of sensors enabled on this device
>>>> + * @sensors_to_en: sensors to be enabled. Each bit represents a sensor
>>>> * @tm_map: pointer to TM register address space
>>>> * @srot_map: pointer to SROT register address space
>>>> * @tm_offset: deal with old device trees that don't address TM and
>>>> SROT
>>>> @@ -569,6 +624,7 @@ struct tsens_context {
>>>> struct tsens_priv {
>>>> struct device *dev;
>>>> u32 num_sensors;
>>>> + u16 sensors_to_en;
>>>> struct regmap *tm_map;
>>>> struct regmap *srot_map;
>>>> u32 tm_offset;
>> --
>> Thanks,
>> Praveenkumar
>
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists