All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Liam Breck <liam@networkimprov.net>
To: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
Cc: Sebastian Reichel <sre@kernel.org>,
	linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com>,
	Liam Breck <kernel@networkimprov.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 4/4] power: bq24190_charger: Delay before polling reset flag
Date: Sat, 8 Apr 2017 12:25:41 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAKvHMgSzSg98JkfwhSCcLoVhBedND3w0UqTeeCP=HwbGVSJSJQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <0ce727cf-7871-89a8-7bec-7915f2699a73@redhat.com>

On Sat, Apr 8, 2017 at 2:58 AM, Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 07-04-17 23:46, Liam Breck wrote:
>>
>> Hi Hans,
>>
>> On Thu, Apr 6, 2017 at 12:20 AM, Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On 06-04-17 05:10, Liam Breck wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> From: Liam Breck <kernel@networkimprov.net>
>>>>
>>>> On chip reset, polling loop was reading reset register immediately.
>>>> Instead, call udelay() before reading chip register.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Can you extend the commit message to explain why udelay is being
>>> called ?  IOW what is the problem with reading the register
>>> immediately which this patch addresses ?
>>
>>
>> I thought I'd read that reset isn't instantaneous, but in testing it
>> seems to be. So I will revert to the original post-reset delay, and
>> change udelay() to usleep_range(10, 20). Any thoughts on those
>> numbers?
>
>
> Using usleep makes no sense for such short delays, so I would stick
> with udelay.
>
> More importantly you still have not explained why we need to delay
> *at all* esp. such a short delay, 10us is a single bit at 100kHz i2c
> so the set bq24190 register-pointer part of the i2c transfer which
> happens before reading back the reset-bit alone takes 20 times as
> long as the delay.
>
> I still don't understand why a delay is needed at all, what are
> you trying to achieve with this delay ? Are you seeing a specific
> problem you are trying to fix ?

A loop with udelay(10) was in the code already, because at manual
9.5.1.2 the note for bit 7 says "Back to 0 after register reset".

But I think you're right, we don't need to loop checking this; I'll
just return -EIO (?) if bit 7 isn't 0 -- which presumably means
charger is kaput.



>
>
>
>
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Cc: Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com>
>>>> Cc: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Liam Breck <kernel@networkimprov.net>
>>>> ---
>>>>  drivers/power/supply/bq24190_charger.c | 8 ++------
>>>>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/power/supply/bq24190_charger.c
>>>> b/drivers/power/supply/bq24190_charger.c
>>>> index fa29cb3..71a796e 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/power/supply/bq24190_charger.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/power/supply/bq24190_charger.c
>>>> @@ -543,18 +543,14 @@ static int bq24190_register_reset(struct
>>>> bq24190_dev_info *bdi)
>>>>
>>>>         /* Reset bit will be cleared by hardware so poll until it is */
>>>>         do {
>>>> +               udelay(10);
>>>>                 ret = bq24190_read_mask(bdi, BQ24190_REG_POC,
>>>>                                 BQ24190_REG_POC_RESET_MASK,
>>>>                                 BQ24190_REG_POC_RESET_SHIFT,
>>>>                                 &v);
>>>>                 if (ret < 0)
>>>>                         return ret;
>>>> -
>>>> -               if (!v)
>>>> -                       break;
>>>> -
>>>> -               udelay(10);
>>>> -       } while (--limit);
>>>> +       } while (v && --limit);
>>>>
>>>>         if (!limit)
>>>>                 return -EIO;
>>>>
>>>
>

  reply	other threads:[~2017-04-08 19:25 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-04-06  3:10 [PATCH v4 0/4] BQ24190 charger fixes Liam Breck
2017-04-06  3:10 ` [PATCH v4 1/4] power: bq24190_charger: Limit over/under voltage fault logging Liam Breck
2017-04-06  7:12   ` Hans de Goede
2017-04-06  3:10 ` [PATCH v4 2/4] power: bq24190_charger: Clean up extcon code Liam Breck
2017-04-06  7:17   ` Hans de Goede
2017-04-07 22:27     ` Liam Breck
2017-04-08 10:02       ` Hans de Goede
2017-04-08 19:09         ` Liam Breck
2017-04-08 20:05           ` Hans de Goede
2017-04-10  9:03             ` Liam Breck
2017-04-10  9:11               ` Hans de Goede
2017-04-06  3:10 ` [PATCH v4 3/4] power: bq24190_charger: Uniform pm_runtime_get() failure handling Liam Breck
2017-04-06  7:19   ` Hans de Goede
2017-04-06  3:10 ` [PATCH v4 4/4] power: bq24190_charger: Delay before polling reset flag Liam Breck
2017-04-06  7:20   ` Hans de Goede
2017-04-07 21:46     ` Liam Breck
2017-04-08  9:58       ` Hans de Goede
2017-04-08 19:25         ` Liam Breck [this message]
2017-04-08 20:14           ` Hans de Goede
2017-04-08 20:46             ` Liam Breck
2017-04-08 20:48               ` Hans de Goede

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='CAKvHMgSzSg98JkfwhSCcLoVhBedND3w0UqTeeCP=HwbGVSJSJQ@mail.gmail.com' \
    --to=liam@networkimprov.net \
    --cc=hdegoede@redhat.com \
    --cc=kernel@networkimprov.net \
    --cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=sre@kernel.org \
    --cc=tony@atomide.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: link
Be 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.