From: Elaine Zhang <zhangqing@rock-chips.com> To: heiko@sntech.de, khilman@baylibre.com, wxt@rock-chips.com Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, huangtao@rock-chips.com, zyw@rock-chips.com, xxx@rock-chips.com, jay.xu@rock-chips.com, linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Elaine Zhang <zhangqing@rock-chips.com> Subject: [PATCH v4 2/6] power-domain: allow domains only handling idle requests Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2016 14:10:22 +0800 [thread overview] Message-ID: <1456467026-16030-3-git-send-email-zhangqing@rock-chips.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <1456467026-16030-1-git-send-email-zhangqing@rock-chips.com> On some Rockchip SoC there exist child-domains only handling their idle state with the actual power-state handled by a parent-domain. So allow such types of domains. For them, we can determine their state (on/of) by checking the inverse idle-state instead. There exist one special case if both idle as well power handling were set as not present, but as the domain-data is defined in the code itself, we can expect the reasonable developer to define them So allow such types of domains. For them, we can determine their state (on/of) by checking the inverse idle-state instead. There exist one special case if both idle as well power handling were set as not present, but as the domain-data is defined in the code itself, we can expect the reasonable developer to define them in a correct, without adding more checks. Signed-off-by: Elaine Zhang <zhangqing@rock-chips.com> --- drivers/soc/rockchip/pm_domains.c | 11 +++++++++-- 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/soc/rockchip/pm_domains.c b/drivers/soc/rockchip/pm_domains.c index c46312d..0465a06 100644 --- a/drivers/soc/rockchip/pm_domains.c +++ b/drivers/soc/rockchip/pm_domains.c @@ -66,8 +66,8 @@ struct rockchip_pmu { #define DOMAIN(pwr, status, req, idle, ack) \ { \ - .pwr_mask = BIT(pwr), \ - .status_mask = BIT(status), \ + .pwr_mask = (pwr >= 0) ? BIT(pwr) : 0, \ + .status_mask = (status >= 0) ? BIT(status) : 0, \ .req_mask = (req >= 0) ? BIT(req) : 0, \ .idle_mask = (idle >= 0) ? BIT(idle) : 0, \ .ack_mask = (ack >= 0) ? BIT(ack) : 0, \ @@ -119,6 +119,10 @@ static bool rockchip_pmu_domain_is_on(struct rockchip_pm_domain *pd) struct rockchip_pmu *pmu = pd->pmu; unsigned int val; + /* check idle status for idle-only domains */ + if (pd->info->status_mask == 0) + return !rockchip_pmu_domain_is_idle(pd); + regmap_read(pmu->regmap, pmu->info->status_offset, &val); /* 1'b0: power on, 1'b1: power off */ @@ -130,6 +134,9 @@ static void rockchip_do_pmu_set_power_domain(struct rockchip_pm_domain *pd, { struct rockchip_pmu *pmu = pd->pmu; + if (pd->info->pwr_mask == 0) + return; + regmap_update_bits(pmu->regmap, pmu->info->pwr_offset, pd->info->pwr_mask, on ? 0 : -1U); -- 1.9.1
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: zhangqing@rock-chips.com (Elaine Zhang) To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Subject: [PATCH v4 2/6] power-domain: allow domains only handling idle requests Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2016 14:10:22 +0800 [thread overview] Message-ID: <1456467026-16030-3-git-send-email-zhangqing@rock-chips.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <1456467026-16030-1-git-send-email-zhangqing@rock-chips.com> On some Rockchip SoC there exist child-domains only handling their idle state with the actual power-state handled by a parent-domain. So allow such types of domains. For them, we can determine their state (on/of) by checking the inverse idle-state instead. There exist one special case if both idle as well power handling were set as not present, but as the domain-data is defined in the code itself, we can expect the reasonable developer to define them So allow such types of domains. For them, we can determine their state (on/of) by checking the inverse idle-state instead. There exist one special case if both idle as well power handling were set as not present, but as the domain-data is defined in the code itself, we can expect the reasonable developer to define them in a correct, without adding more checks. Signed-off-by: Elaine Zhang <zhangqing@rock-chips.com> --- drivers/soc/rockchip/pm_domains.c | 11 +++++++++-- 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/soc/rockchip/pm_domains.c b/drivers/soc/rockchip/pm_domains.c index c46312d..0465a06 100644 --- a/drivers/soc/rockchip/pm_domains.c +++ b/drivers/soc/rockchip/pm_domains.c @@ -66,8 +66,8 @@ struct rockchip_pmu { #define DOMAIN(pwr, status, req, idle, ack) \ { \ - .pwr_mask = BIT(pwr), \ - .status_mask = BIT(status), \ + .pwr_mask = (pwr >= 0) ? BIT(pwr) : 0, \ + .status_mask = (status >= 0) ? BIT(status) : 0, \ .req_mask = (req >= 0) ? BIT(req) : 0, \ .idle_mask = (idle >= 0) ? BIT(idle) : 0, \ .ack_mask = (ack >= 0) ? BIT(ack) : 0, \ @@ -119,6 +119,10 @@ static bool rockchip_pmu_domain_is_on(struct rockchip_pm_domain *pd) struct rockchip_pmu *pmu = pd->pmu; unsigned int val; + /* check idle status for idle-only domains */ + if (pd->info->status_mask == 0) + return !rockchip_pmu_domain_is_idle(pd); + regmap_read(pmu->regmap, pmu->info->status_offset, &val); /* 1'b0: power on, 1'b1: power off */ @@ -130,6 +134,9 @@ static void rockchip_do_pmu_set_power_domain(struct rockchip_pm_domain *pd, { struct rockchip_pmu *pmu = pd->pmu; + if (pd->info->pwr_mask == 0) + return; + regmap_update_bits(pmu->regmap, pmu->info->pwr_offset, pd->info->pwr_mask, on ? 0 : -1U); -- 1.9.1
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-02-26 6:18 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2016-02-26 6:10 [PATCH v4 0/6] rockchip: power-domain: fix pm domain for support RK3399 SoC Elaine Zhang 2016-02-26 6:10 ` Elaine Zhang 2016-02-26 6:10 ` [PATCH v4 1/6] rockchip: power-domain: make idle handling optional Elaine Zhang 2016-02-26 6:10 ` Elaine Zhang 2016-02-26 6:10 ` Elaine Zhang 2016-02-26 6:10 ` Elaine Zhang [this message] 2016-02-26 6:10 ` [PATCH v4 2/6] power-domain: allow domains only handling idle requests Elaine Zhang 2016-02-26 6:10 ` [PATCH v4 3/6] rockchip: power-domain: add support for sub-power domains Elaine Zhang 2016-02-26 6:10 ` Elaine Zhang 2016-02-26 6:10 ` [PATCH v4 4/6] dt/bindings: power: add RK3399 SoCs header for power-domain Elaine Zhang 2016-02-26 6:10 ` Elaine Zhang 2016-02-26 6:12 ` [PATCH v4 5/6] dt/bindings: rockchip: modify document of Rockchip power domains Elaine Zhang 2016-02-26 6:12 ` Elaine Zhang 2016-03-03 0:19 ` Kevin Hilman 2016-03-03 0:19 ` Kevin Hilman 2016-02-26 6:12 ` [PATCH v4 6/6] rockchip: power-domain: Modify power domain driver for rk3399 Elaine Zhang 2016-02-26 6:12 ` Elaine Zhang
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=1456467026-16030-3-git-send-email-zhangqing@rock-chips.com \ --to=zhangqing@rock-chips.com \ --cc=heiko@sntech.de \ --cc=huangtao@rock-chips.com \ --cc=jay.xu@rock-chips.com \ --cc=khilman@baylibre.com \ --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \ --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org \ --cc=wxt@rock-chips.com \ --cc=xxx@rock-chips.com \ --cc=zyw@rock-chips.com \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.