linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] regulator: qcom-rpmh: Update ranges for FTSMPS525

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <eaa02c1b-a742-4d17-b4fc-de09c9003121@quicinc.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2024 11:13:15 -0700
From: Melody Olvera <quic_molvera@...cinc.com>
To: David Collins <quic_collinsd@...cinc.com>,
        Liam Girdwood
	<lgirdwood@...il.com>, Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
        Trilok Soni
	<quic_tsoni@...cinc.com>,
        Satya Durga Srinivasu Prabhala
	<quic_satyap@...cinc.com>
CC: <linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] regulator: qcom-rpmh: Update ranges for FTSMPS525



On 10/22/2024 6:27 PM, David Collins wrote:
> On 10/21/24 16:03, Melody Olvera wrote:
>> The FTSMPS525 regulator has several potential ranges,
>> so update the ranges accordingly for SM8750.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Melody Olvera <quic_molvera@...cinc.com>
>> ---
>>   drivers/regulator/qcom-rpmh-regulator.c | 9 ++++++---
>>   1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/regulator/qcom-rpmh-regulator.c b/drivers/regulator/qcom-rpmh-regulator.c
>> index 6c343b4b9d15..272de7bc9c88 100644
>> --- a/drivers/regulator/qcom-rpmh-regulator.c
>> +++ b/drivers/regulator/qcom-rpmh-regulator.c
>> @@ -848,9 +848,10 @@ static const struct rpmh_vreg_hw_data pmic5_ftsmps525_lv = {
>>   	.ops = &rpmh_regulator_vrm_ops,
>>   	.voltage_ranges = (struct linear_range[]) {
>>   		REGULATOR_LINEAR_RANGE(300000, 0, 267, 4000),
>> +		REGULATOR_LINEAR_RANGE(1376000, 268, 438, 8000),
>>   	},
>> -	.n_linear_ranges = 1,
>> -	.n_voltages = 268,
>> +	.n_linear_ranges = 2,
>> +	.n_voltages = 439,
>>   	.pmic_mode_map = pmic_mode_map_pmic5_smps,
>>   	.of_map_mode = rpmh_regulator_pmic4_smps_of_map_mode,
>>   };
> This configuration which specifies both LV and MV ranges should replace
> the pmic5_ftsmps525_lv and pmic5_ftsmps525_mv configurations.  It should
> then be used in the per-PMIC data tables below.
>
> All FTSMPS525 type regulators physically support both LV and MV ranges.
> However, the per-regulator selection of which range is used can only be
> set by boot loader firmware and the configuration is locked in hardware
> after initialization.  Unfortunately, the qcom-rpmh-regulator driver has
> no mechanism to determine at runtime if LV or MV range has been set for
> a particular regulator.  Additionally, that exact same regulator in the
> same PMIC could be configured for the other range when used on a
> different board (where the power grid has different requirements).
>
> Listing support in a unified configuration for both LV and MV ranges
> fixes the situation as it will work on all boards regardless of firmware
> LV vs MV selection.  This also accurately captures the capability of the
> regulator at a hardware level.

Understood; I'll merge the lv and mv configs together as we discussed 
and update
the driver accordingly.

>
>> @@ -1196,6 +1197,8 @@ static const struct rpmh_vreg_init_data pm8550vs_vreg_data[] = {
>>   	RPMH_VREG("smps4",  "smp%s4",  &pmic5_ftsmps525_lv, "vdd-s4"),
>>   	RPMH_VREG("smps5",  "smp%s5",  &pmic5_ftsmps525_lv, "vdd-s5"),
>>   	RPMH_VREG("smps6",  "smp%s6",  &pmic5_ftsmps525_mv, "vdd-s6"),
>> +	RPMH_VREG("smps7",  "smp%s7",  &pmic5_ftsmps525_lv, "vdd-s7"),
>> +	RPMH_VREG("smps8",  "smp%s8",  &pmic5_ftsmps525_lv, "vdd-s8"),
> These lines should not be added.  PMIC PM8550VS only has 6 FTSMPS525
> regulators inside.

Ack.

>
>>   	RPMH_VREG("ldo1",   "ldo%s1",  &pmic5_nldo515,   "vdd-l1"),
>>   	RPMH_VREG("ldo2",   "ldo%s2",  &pmic5_nldo515,   "vdd-l2"),
>>   	RPMH_VREG("ldo3",   "ldo%s3",  &pmic5_nldo515,   "vdd-l3"),
>> @@ -1205,7 +1208,7 @@ static const struct rpmh_vreg_init_data pm8550vs_vreg_data[] = {
>>   static const struct rpmh_vreg_init_data pm8550ve_vreg_data[] = {
>>   	RPMH_VREG("smps1", "smp%s1", &pmic5_ftsmps525_lv, "vdd-s1"),
>>   	RPMH_VREG("smps2", "smp%s2", &pmic5_ftsmps525_lv, "vdd-s2"),
>> -	RPMH_VREG("smps3", "smp%s3", &pmic5_ftsmps525_lv, "vdd-s3"),
>> +	RPMH_VREG("smps3", "smp%s3", &pmic5_ftsmps525_mv, "vdd-s3"),
>>   	RPMH_VREG("smps4", "smp%s4", &pmic5_ftsmps525_mv, "vdd-s4"),
>>   	RPMH_VREG("smps5", "smp%s5", &pmic5_ftsmps525_lv, "vdd-s5"),
>>   	RPMH_VREG("smps6", "smp%s6", &pmic5_ftsmps525_lv, "vdd-s6"),
>>
>> base-commit: 63b3ff03d91ae8f875fe8747c781a521f78cde17
> Take care,
> David Collins
>