From: Phil Reid <preid@electromag.com.au>
To: Martin Kaiser <martin@kaiser.cx>, Jonathan Cameron <jic23@kernel.org>
Cc: Hartmut Knaack <knaack.h@gmx.de>,
Peter Meerwald-Stadler <pmeerw@pmeerw.net>,
Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@metafoo.de>,
linux-iio@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: iio: Is storing output values to non volatile registers something we should do automatically or leave to userspace action. [was Re: [PATCH] iio: potentiometer: max5432: update the non-volatile position]
Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2019 19:08:12 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <42d99cc8-e59b-6c0b-d1e3-5690b8d1fe53@electromag.com.au> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190812103751.gumfzgazlytq5zqm@viti.kaiser.cx>
G'day Martin / Jonathan,
On 12/08/2019 18:37, Martin Kaiser wrote:
> Hi Jonathan,
>
> Thus wrote Jonathan Cameron (jic23@kernel.org):
>
>> The patch is fine, but I'm wondering about whether we need some element
>> of policy control on this restore to current value.
>
>> A few things to take into account.
>
>> * Some devices don't have a non volatile store. So userspace will be
>> responsible for doing the restore on reboot.
>> * This may be one of several related devices, and it may make no sense
>> to restore this one if the others aren't going to be in the same
>> state as before the reboot.
>> * Some devices only have non volatile registers for this sort of value
>> (or save to non volatile on removal of power). Hence any policy to
>> not store the value can't apply to this class of device.
>
> I see your point. You'd like a consistent bahaviour across all
> potentiometer drivers. Or at least a way for user space to figure out
> whether a chip uses non-volatile storage or not.
> This property doesn't quite fit into the channel info that are defined
> in the arrays in drivers/iio/industrialio-core.c. Is there any other way
> to set such a property?
>
>> My initial thought is that these probably don't matter that much and
>> we should apply this, but I would like to seek input from others!
>
>> I thought there were some other drivers doing similar store to no
>> volatile but I can't find one.
>
> drivers/iio/potentiometer/max5481.c and max5487.c do something similar.
>
> They use a command to transfer the setting from volatile to non-volatile
> register in the spi remove function. I guess that the intention is to
> save the current setting when the system is rebooted. However, my
> understanding is that the remove function is called only when a module
> is unloaded or when user space does explicitly unbind the device from
> the bus via sysfs. That's why I tried using the shutdown function
> instead.
>
> Still, this approach has some disadvantages. For many systems, there's a
> soft reboot (shutdown -r) where the driver's shutdown function is called
> and a "hard reboot" where the power from the CPU and the potentiometer
> chip is removed and reapplied. In this case, the current value would not
> be transfered to the non-volatile register.
>
> At least for the max5432 family, there's no way to read the current
> setting. The only option for user space to have a well-defined setting
> is to set the wiper position explicitly at startup.
>
> I guess the only sensible way to use a non-volatile register would be a
> write operation where user space gets a response about successful
> completion.
>
> We could have two channels to write to the volatile or to non-volatile
> register. Or we stick to one channel and update both volatile and
> non-volatile registers when user space changes the value. This assumes
> that the setting does not change frequently, which is prabably not true
> for all applications...
>
> Whatever we come up with, we should at least make the max* chips behave
> the same way.
>
The AD5272/AD5274 Digital Rheostat has a 50-times limit for programming the NV register.
So you want to be real sure that you want to set it.
I'd rather my system default to a known "safe" value for next boot than
set to whatever the last write was. So some kind of policy on setting this would
be nice. I personally think it's something that userspace should initiate via an explicit
command.
Writing the NV for the AD5272 is something I planned to add at some stage.
But so far the default factory values have worked ok.
It'd be nice for cross device consistency for any interface for this.
--
Regards
Phil Reid
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-08-12 11:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-08-09 16:06 [PATCH] iio: potentiometer: max5432: update the non-volatile position Martin Kaiser
2019-08-11 9:11 ` iio: Is storing output values to non volatile registers something we should do automatically or leave to userspace action. [was Re: [PATCH] iio: potentiometer: max5432: update the non-volatile position] Jonathan Cameron
2019-08-12 10:37 ` Martin Kaiser
2019-08-12 11:08 ` Phil Reid [this message]
2019-08-18 19:32 ` Jonathan Cameron
2019-08-22 8:36 ` Phil Reid
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=42d99cc8-e59b-6c0b-d1e3-5690b8d1fe53@electromag.com.au \
--to=preid@electromag.com.au \
--cc=jic23@kernel.org \
--cc=knaack.h@gmx.de \
--cc=lars@metafoo.de \
--cc=linux-iio@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=martin@kaiser.cx \
--cc=pmeerw@pmeerw.net \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).