nvmem: qfprom: Add binding updates and power-domain handling
Subsystems (5)
cover nvmem: qfprom: Add binding updates and power-domain handling
qfprom devices on sc7280 have an additional requirement to vote on a power-domain performance state to reliably blow fuses. Add the binding updates and handle this in the driver, also add the DT node for sc7280 platform.
Rajendra Nayak (3):
dt-bindings: nvmem: qfprom: Add optional power-domains property
nvmem: qfprom: sc7280: Handle the additional power-domains vote
arm64: dts: qcom: sc7280: Add qfprom node
.../devicetree/bindings/nvmem/qcom,qfprom.yaml | 3 +++ arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280.dtsi | 13 +++++++++++++ drivers/nvmem/qfprom.c | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++++ 3 files changed, 38 insertions(+)
Signature · 2 lines
QUALCOMM INDIA, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation
PATCH 1/3 dt-bindings: nvmem: qfprom: Add optional power-domains property
qfprom devices on some SoCs need to vote on the performance state of a power-domain, so add the power-domains optional property to the bindings
--- Documentation/devicetree/bindings/nvmem/qcom,qfprom.yaml | 3 +++ 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/nvmem/qcom,qfprom.yaml +3 -0
@@ -51,6 +51,9 @@ properties: vcc-supply: description: Our power supply. + power-domains: + description: A phandle to a power domain node. + # Needed if any child nodes are present. "#address-cells": const: 1
Signature · 2 lines
QUALCOMM INDIA, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation
PATCH 2/3 nvmem: qfprom: sc7280: Handle the additional power-domains vote
In reply to Rajendra NayakOn sc7280, to reliably blow fuses, we need an additional vote on max performance state of 'MX' power-domain.
Add support for power-domain performance state voting in the driver.
--- drivers/nvmem/qfprom.c | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+)
drivers/nvmem/qfprom.c +22 -0
@@ -12,6 +12,8 @@#include <linux/mod_devicetable.h> #include <linux/nvmem-provider.h> #include <linux/platform_device.h> +#include <linux/pm_domain.h> +#include <linux/pm_runtime.h> #include <linux/property.h> #include <linux/regulator/consumer.h>
@@ -149,6 +151,11 @@ static void qfprom_disable_fuse_blowing(const struct qfprom_priv *priv,if (ret)dev_warn (priv->dev,"Failed to set 0 voltage (ignoring)\n" ); +if (priv->dev->pm_domain) { +dev_pm_genpd_set_performance_state (priv->dev,0 ); +pm_runtime_put (priv->dev); + } + ret =regulator_disable (priv->vcc);if (ret)dev_warn (priv->dev,"Failed to disable regulator (ignoring)\n" );
@@ -212,6 +219,16 @@ static int qfprom_enable_fuse_blowing(const struct qfprom_priv *priv, goto err_clk_rate_set; } +if (priv->dev->pm_domain) { + ret =pm_runtime_get_sync (priv->dev); +if (ret <0 ) { +pm_runtime_put_noidle (priv->dev); +dev_err (priv->dev,"Failed to enable power-domain\n" ); + goto err_reg_enable; + } +dev_pm_genpd_set_performance_state (priv->dev,INT_MAX ); + } + old->timer_val =readl (priv->qfpconf +QFPROM_BLOW_TIMER_OFFSET ); old->accel_val =readl (priv->qfpconf +QFPROM_ACCEL_OFFSET ); writel(priv->soc_data->qfprom_blow_timer_value,
@@ -221,6 +238,8 @@ static int qfprom_enable_fuse_blowing(const struct qfprom_priv *priv,return 0 ; +err_reg_enable: +regulator_disable (priv->vcc); err_clk_rate_set:clk_set_rate (priv->secclk, old->clk_rate); err_clk_prepared:
@@ -420,6 +439,9 @@ static int qfprom_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) econfig.reg_write = qfprom_reg_write; } +if (dev->pm_domain) +pm_runtime_enable (dev); + nvmem =devm_nvmem_register (dev, &econfig);return PTR_ERR_OR_ZERO (nvmem);
Signature · 2 lines
QUALCOMM INDIA, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation
Re: [PATCH 2/3] nvmem: qfprom: sc7280: Handle the additional power-domains vote
Hi,
Quoted 63 lines · Rajendra Nayak
On sc7280, to reliably blow fuses, we need an additional vote on max performance state of 'MX' power-domain.
Add support for power-domain performance state voting in the driver.Signed-off-by Rajendra Nayak <[email protected]>--- drivers/nvmem/qfprom.c | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+)drivers/nvmem/qfprom.c +19
-0@@ -12,6 +12,8 @@#include <linux/mod_devicetable.h> #include <linux/nvmem-provider.h> #include <linux/platform_device.h> +#include <linux/pm_domain.h> +#include <linux/pm_runtime.h> #include <linux/property.h> #include <linux/regulator/consumer.h> @@ -149,6 +151,11 @@ static void qfprom_disable_fuse_blowing(const struct qfprom_priv *priv,if (ret)dev_warn (priv->dev,"Failed to set 0 voltage (ignoring)\n" ); +if (priv->dev->pm_domain) { +dev_pm_genpd_set_performance_state (priv->dev,0 ); +pm_runtime_put (priv->dev); + } + ret =regulator_disable (priv->vcc);if (ret)dev_warn (priv->dev,"Failed to disable regulator (ignoring)\n" );@@ -212,6 +219,16 @@ static int qfprom_enable_fuse_blowing(const struct qfprom_priv *priv, goto err_clk_rate_set; } +if (priv->dev->pm_domain) { + ret =pm_runtime_get_sync (priv->dev); +if (ret <0 ) { +pm_runtime_put_noidle (priv->dev); +dev_err (priv->dev,"Failed to enable power-domain\n" ); + goto err_reg_enable; + } +dev_pm_genpd_set_performance_state (priv->dev,INT_MAX ); + } + old->timer_val =readl (priv->qfpconf +QFPROM_BLOW_TIMER_OFFSET ); old->accel_val =readl (priv->qfpconf +QFPROM_ACCEL_OFFSET ); writel(priv->soc_data->qfprom_blow_timer_value,@@ -221,6 +238,8 @@ static int qfprom_enable_fuse_blowing(const struct qfprom_priv *priv,return 0 ; +err_reg_enable: +regulator_disable (priv->vcc); err_clk_rate_set:clk_set_rate (priv->secclk, old->clk_rate); err_clk_prepared:
drivers/nvmem/qfprom.c static int qfprom_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) · line 444
Quoted 6 lines
drivers/nvmem/qfprom.c +3
-0@@ -420,6 +439,9 @@ static int qfprom_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) econfig.reg_write = qfprom_reg_write; } +if (dev->pm_domain) +pm_runtime_enable (dev); +
Where is the matching pm_runtime_disable()? Should be one in .remove(), or use devm_add_action_or_reset() to wrap a call to it.
Also: do you really need to test for dev->pm_domain in your patch? Seems like it should always be fine to call pm_runtime_enable() and then always fine to call the get/put. ...and presumably always fine to even set the performance state?
-Doug
Re: [PATCH 2/3] nvmem: qfprom: sc7280: Handle the additional power-domains vote
Quoted 69 lines · Doug Anderson
Hi,
Quoted 66 lines · Rajendra Nayak
On sc7280, to reliably blow fuses, we need an additional vote on max performance state of 'MX' power-domain.
Add support for power-domain performance state voting in the driver.Signed-off-by Rajendra Nayak <[email protected]>--- drivers/nvmem/qfprom.c | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+)drivers/nvmem/qfprom.c +19
-0@@ -12,6 +12,8 @@#include <linux/mod_devicetable.h> #include <linux/nvmem-provider.h> #include <linux/platform_device.h> +#include <linux/pm_domain.h> +#include <linux/pm_runtime.h> #include <linux/property.h> #include <linux/regulator/consumer.h> @@ -149,6 +151,11 @@ static void qfprom_disable_fuse_blowing(const struct qfprom_priv *priv,if (ret)dev_warn (priv->dev,"Failed to set 0 voltage (ignoring)\n" ); +if (priv->dev->pm_domain) { +dev_pm_genpd_set_performance_state (priv->dev,0 ); +pm_runtime_put (priv->dev); + } + ret =regulator_disable (priv->vcc);if (ret)dev_warn (priv->dev,"Failed to disable regulator (ignoring)\n" );@@ -212,6 +219,16 @@ static int qfprom_enable_fuse_blowing(const struct qfprom_priv *priv, goto err_clk_rate_set; } +if (priv->dev->pm_domain) { + ret =pm_runtime_get_sync (priv->dev); +if (ret <0 ) { +pm_runtime_put_noidle (priv->dev); +dev_err (priv->dev,"Failed to enable power-domain\n" ); + goto err_reg_enable; + } +dev_pm_genpd_set_performance_state (priv->dev,INT_MAX ); + } + old->timer_val =readl (priv->qfpconf +QFPROM_BLOW_TIMER_OFFSET ); old->accel_val =readl (priv->qfpconf +QFPROM_ACCEL_OFFSET ); writel(priv->soc_data->qfprom_blow_timer_value,@@ -221,6 +238,8 @@ static int qfprom_enable_fuse_blowing(const struct qfprom_priv *priv,return 0 ; +err_reg_enable: +regulator_disable (priv->vcc); err_clk_rate_set:clk_set_rate (priv->secclk, old->clk_rate); err_clk_prepared:@@ -420,6 +439,9 @@ static int qfprom_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) econfig.reg_write = qfprom_reg_write; }
Quoted 6 lines
drivers/nvmem/qfprom.c static int qfprom_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) · line 444
Quoted 3 lines
drivers/nvmem/qfprom.c +3
-0+if (dev->pm_domain) +pm_runtime_enable (dev); +Where is the matching
pm_runtime_disable()? Should be one in .remove(), or usedevm_add_action_or_reset()to wrap a call to it.
Ah, right, i need to handle that.
Quoted 5 lines
Also: do you really need to test for
dev->pm_domainin your patch? Seems like it should always be fine to callpm_runtime_enable()and then always fine to call the get/put. ...and presumably always fine to even set the performance state?
Sure, i'll give it a try and see if that works or ends up throwing me any warns, i'll repost with that or update if that does not work for some reason. thanks for the review.
Signature · 2 lines
QUALCOMM INDIA, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation
PATCH 3/3 arm64: dts: qcom: sc7280: Add qfprom node
In reply to Rajendra NayakAdd the qfprom node and its properties for the sc7280 SoC.
--- arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280.dtsi | 13 +++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+)
arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280.dtsi +13 -0
@@ -436,6 +436,19 @@ #mbox-cells = <2>; }; + qfprom: efuse@784000 { + compatible = "qcom,sc7280-qfprom", "qcom,qfprom"; + reg = <0 0x00784000 0 0xa20>, + <0 0x00780000 0 0xa20>, + <0 0x00782000 0 0x120>, + <0 0x00786000 0 0x1fff>; + clocks = <&gcc GCC_SEC_CTRL_CLK_SRC>; + clock-names = "core"; + power-domains = <&rpmhpd SC7280_MX>; + #address-cells = <1>; + #size-cells = <1>; + }; + qupv3_id_0: geniqup@9c0000 { compatible = "qcom,geni-se-qup"; reg = <0 0x009c0000 0 0x2000>;
Signature · 2 lines
QUALCOMM INDIA, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation