From: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>
To: Philipp Rosenberger <p.rosenberger@kunbus.com>
Cc: "Uwe Kleine-König" <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>,
dan.carpenter@oracle.com, biwen.li@nxp.com, lvb@xiphos.com,
bruno.thomsen@gmail.com, l.sanfilippo@kunbus.com,
"Alessandro Zummo" <a.zummo@towertech.it>,
linux-rtc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] rtc: pcf2127: Disable Power-On Reset Override
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2021 11:53:44 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210114105344.GW3654@piout.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4f5a806d-ca18-cd94-33ea-86e8a84e345a@kunbus.com>
On 14/01/2021 11:43:22+0100, Philipp Rosenberger wrote:
> On 14.01.21 10:33, Alexandre Belloni wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On 14/01/2021 10:10:32+0100, Philipp Rosenberger wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > On 14.01.21 09:05, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Jan 13, 2021 at 12:27:41PM +0100, Philipp Rosenberger wrote:
> > > > > To resume normal operation after a total power loss (no or empty
> > > > > battery) the "Power-On Reset Override (PORO)" facility needs to be
> > > > > disabled.
> > > > >
> > > > > As the oscillator may take a long time (200 ms to 2 s) to resume normal
> > > > > operation. The default behaviour is to use the PORO facility.
> > > >
> > > > I'd write instead: The register reset value sets PORO enabled and the
> > > > data sheet recommends setting it to disabled for normal operation.
> > >
> > > Sounds good, I will rephrase it.
> > >
> > > > In my eyes having a reset default value that is unsuitable for
> > > > production use is just another bad design choice of this chip. At least
> > > > now this is known and can be somewhat fixed in software. :-\
> > >
> > > Yes, had my fair share of WTF moments with this chip.
> > >
> > > > > But with the PORO active no interrupts are generated on the interrupt
> > > > > pin (INT).
> > > >
> > > > This sentence about no interrupts is your observation, or does this base
> > > > on some authoritative source (datasheet, FAE or similar)?
> > > >
> > >
> > > Yes this is only may observation. I tested this with the OM13513 demoboard
> > > with PCF2127 and pcf2129. So I should rephrase it to something like this:
> > >
> > > Some testes suggests that no interrupts are generated on the interrupt pin
> > > if the PORP is active.
> > >
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Philipp Rosenberger <p.rosenberger@kunbus.com>
> > > > > ---
> > > > > drivers/rtc/rtc-pcf2127.c | 18 ++++++++++++++++++
> > > > > 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+)
> > > > >
> > > > > diff --git a/drivers/rtc/rtc-pcf2127.c b/drivers/rtc/rtc-pcf2127.c
> > > > > index 39a7b5116aa4..378b1ce812d6 100644
> > > > > --- a/drivers/rtc/rtc-pcf2127.c
> > > > > +++ b/drivers/rtc/rtc-pcf2127.c
> > > > > @@ -26,6 +26,7 @@
> > > > > /* Control register 1 */
> > > > > #define PCF2127_REG_CTRL1 0x00
> > > > > +#define PCF2127_BIT_CTRL1_POR_OVRD BIT(3)
> > > > > #define PCF2127_BIT_CTRL1_TSF1 BIT(4)
> > > > > /* Control register 2 */
> > > > > #define PCF2127_REG_CTRL2 0x01
> > > > > @@ -612,6 +613,23 @@ static int pcf2127_probe(struct device *dev, struct regmap *regmap,
> > > > > ret = devm_rtc_nvmem_register(pcf2127->rtc, &nvmem_cfg);
> > > > > }
> > > > > + /*
> > > > > + * The "Power-On Reset Override" facility prevents the RTC to do a reset
> > > > > + * after power on. For normal operation the PORO must be disabled.
> > > > > + */
> > > > > + regmap_clear_bits(pcf2127->regmap, PCF2127_REG_CTRL1,
> > > > > + PCF2127_BIT_CTRL1_POR_OVRD);
> > > > > + /*
> > > > > + * If the PORO can't be disabled, just move on. The RTC should
> > > > > + * work fine, but functions like watchdog and alarm interrupts might
> > > > > + * not work. There will be no interrupt generated on the interrupt pin.
> > > > > + */
> > > > > + ret = regmap_test_bits(pcf2127->regmap, PCF2127_REG_CTRL1, PCF2127_BIT_CTRL1_POR_OVRD);
> > > > > + if (ret <= 0) {
> > > > > + dev_err(dev, "%s: can't disable PORO (ctrl1).\n", __func__);
> > > > > + dev_warn(dev, "Watchdog and alarm functions might not work properly\n");
> > > >
> > > > I would not emit two messages here. Also including __func__ isn't so
> > > > nice IMHO. (Great for debugging, but not in production code IMHO.)
> > >
> > > Yes, I dislike the style of the messages in this module. I just thought to
> > > keep it consistent.
> >
> > No one will ever read the message, the whole test is useless.
>
> Sorry, if I bother you with may questions. I'm unsure of why do you think
> the test is useless. Is it because it is unlikely to happen? Or that it is
> not relevant to report this?
It is not relevant because no action will be taken by the user following
this message.
>
> > >
> > > I'm thinking of rewriting this driver as MFD driver. We use the CLKOUT for
> > > some products. So maybe a RTC, watchdog and clock driver on top of an MFD.
> > > But I'm not sure if it is really a good idea. The behavior of the chip to
> > > disable the watchdog when reading ctrl2 (i think it was) giving me a
> > > headache.
> >
> > Don't, this is not an MFD. There is no issue with having the RTC driver
> > being a clock provider.
>
> OK, this is a clear statement.
>
> Best Regards,
> Philipp
--
Alexandre Belloni, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-01-14 10:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-01-13 11:27 [PATCH v2 0/2] rtc: pcf2127: proper initialization after power loss Philipp Rosenberger
2021-01-13 11:27 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] rtc: pcf2127: Disable Power-On Reset Override Philipp Rosenberger
2021-01-14 8:05 ` Uwe Kleine-König
2021-01-14 9:10 ` Philipp Rosenberger
2021-01-14 9:33 ` Alexandre Belloni
2021-01-14 10:43 ` Philipp Rosenberger
2021-01-14 10:53 ` Alexandre Belloni [this message]
2021-01-14 11:11 ` Philipp Rosenberger
2021-01-13 11:27 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] rtc: pcf2127: Run a OTP refresh if not done before Philipp Rosenberger
2021-01-14 8:06 ` Uwe Kleine-König
2021-01-14 9:15 ` Philipp Rosenberger
2021-01-14 9:50 ` Alexandre Belloni
2021-01-14 10:30 ` Philipp Rosenberger
2021-01-14 11:11 ` Alexandre Belloni
2021-01-14 11:18 ` Philipp Rosenberger
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=20210114105344.GW3654@piout.net \
--to=alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com \
--cc=a.zummo@towertech.it \
--cc=biwen.li@nxp.com \
--cc=bruno.thomsen@gmail.com \
--cc=dan.carpenter@oracle.com \
--cc=l.sanfilippo@kunbus.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-rtc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lvb@xiphos.com \
--cc=p.rosenberger@kunbus.com \
--cc=u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de \
/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).