linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 8/8] PCI: qcom: Add support to PCIe slot power supplies

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <52b32254-8468-4fba-8357-0edc54dee129@kernel.org>
Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2024 13:02:29 +0200
From: Konrad Dybcio <konradybcio@...nel.org>
To: Qiang Yu <quic_qianyu@...cinc.com>, manivannan.sadhasivam@...aro.org,
 vkoul@...nel.org, kishon@...nel.org, robh@...nel.org, andersson@...nel.org,
 konradybcio@...nel.org, krzk+dt@...nel.org, conor+dt@...nel.org,
 mturquette@...libre.com, sboyd@...nel.org, abel.vesa@...aro.org,
 quic_msarkar@...cinc.com, quic_devipriy@...cinc.com
Cc: dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org, kw@...ux.com, lpieralisi@...nel.org,
 neil.armstrong@...aro.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-phy@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-pci@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-clk@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 8/8] PCI: qcom: Add support to PCIe slot power supplies

On 27.08.2024 8:36 AM, Qiang Yu wrote:
> On platform x1e80100 QCP, PCIe3 is a standard x8 form factor. Hence, add
> support to use 3.3v, 3.3v aux and 12v regulators.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Qiang Yu <quic_qianyu@...cinc.com>
> ---
>  drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-qcom.c | 52 +++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>  1 file changed, 50 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-qcom.c b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-qcom.c
> index 6f953e32d990..59fb415dfeeb 100644
> --- a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-qcom.c
> +++ b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-qcom.c
> @@ -248,6 +248,8 @@ struct qcom_pcie_cfg {
>  	bool no_l0s;
>  };
>  
> +#define QCOM_PCIE_SLOT_MAX_SUPPLIES			3
> +
>  struct qcom_pcie {
>  	struct dw_pcie *pci;
>  	void __iomem *parf;			/* DT parf */
> @@ -260,6 +262,7 @@ struct qcom_pcie {
>  	struct icc_path *icc_cpu;
>  	const struct qcom_pcie_cfg *cfg;
>  	struct dentry *debugfs;
> +	struct regulator_bulk_data slot_supplies[QCOM_PCIE_SLOT_MAX_SUPPLIES];
>  	bool suspended;
>  	bool use_pm_opp;
>  };
> @@ -1174,6 +1177,41 @@ static int qcom_pcie_link_up(struct dw_pcie *pci)
>  	return !!(val & PCI_EXP_LNKSTA_DLLLA);
>  }
>  
> +static int qcom_pcie_enable_slot_supplies(struct qcom_pcie *pcie)
> +{
> +	struct dw_pcie *pci = pcie->pci;
> +	int ret;
> +
> +	ret = regulator_bulk_enable(ARRAY_SIZE(pcie->slot_supplies),
> +				    pcie->slot_supplies);
> +	if (ret < 0)
> +		dev_err(pci->dev, "Failed to enable slot regulators\n");

return dev_err_probe would be a good call.. probably more so below,
but won't hurt to use here too

> +
> +	return ret;
> +}
> +
> +static void qcom_pcie_disable_slot_supplies(struct qcom_pcie *pcie)
> +{
> +	regulator_bulk_disable(ARRAY_SIZE(pcie->slot_supplies),
> +			       pcie->slot_supplies);
> +}

This I feel like is overly abstracted

Konrad