* [PATCH v5 1/5] firmware: arm_scmi: Add Voltage Domain Support
2020-11-17 12:34 [PATCH v5 0/5] Add support for SCMIv3.0 Voltage Domain Protocol and SCMI-Regulator Cristian Marussi
@ 2020-11-17 12:34 ` Cristian Marussi
2020-11-19 16:08 ` Sudeep Holla
2020-11-17 12:34 ` [PATCH v5 2/5] firmware: arm_scmi: add SCMI Voltage Domain devname Cristian Marussi
` (3 subsequent siblings)
4 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: Cristian Marussi @ 2020-11-17 12:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-kernel, linux-arm-kernel, devicetree
Cc: sudeep.holla, lukasz.luba, Jonathan.Cameron, broonie, robh,
satyakim, etienne.carriere, f.fainelli, vincent.guittot,
souvik.chakravarty, cristian.marussi
Add SCMI Voltage Domain protocol support.
Signed-off-by: Cristian Marussi <cristian.marussi@arm.com>
---
v4 --> v5
- removed inline
- moved segmented intervals defines
- fixed some macros complaints by checkpatch
v3 --> v4
- avoid fixed sized typing in voltage_info
- avoid coccinelle falde complaints about pointer-sized allocations
v2 --> v3
- restrict segmented voltage domain descriptors to one triplet
- removed unneeded inline
- free allocated resources for invalid voltage domain
- added __must_check to info_get voltage operations
- added a few comments
- removed fixed size typing from struct voltage_info
v1 --> v2
- fix voltage levels query loop to reload full cmd description
between iterations as reported by Etienne Carriere
- ensure rx buffer is properly sized calli scmi_reset_rx_to_maxsz
between transfers
---
drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/Makefile | 2 +-
drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/common.h | 1 +
drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/driver.c | 2 +
drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/voltage.c | 397 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
include/linux/scmi_protocol.h | 64 +++++
5 files changed, 465 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
create mode 100644 drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/voltage.c
diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/Makefile b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/Makefile
index bc0d54f8e861..6a2ef63306d6 100644
--- a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/Makefile
+++ b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/Makefile
@@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ scmi-driver-y = driver.o notify.o
scmi-transport-y = shmem.o
scmi-transport-$(CONFIG_MAILBOX) += mailbox.o
scmi-transport-$(CONFIG_HAVE_ARM_SMCCC_DISCOVERY) += smc.o
-scmi-protocols-y = base.o clock.o perf.o power.o reset.o sensors.o system.o
+scmi-protocols-y = base.o clock.o perf.o power.o reset.o sensors.o system.o voltage.o
scmi-module-objs := $(scmi-bus-y) $(scmi-driver-y) $(scmi-protocols-y) \
$(scmi-transport-y)
obj-$(CONFIG_ARM_SCMI_PROTOCOL) += scmi-module.o
diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/common.h b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/common.h
index 65063fa948d4..c0fb45e7c3e8 100644
--- a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/common.h
+++ b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/common.h
@@ -169,6 +169,7 @@ DECLARE_SCMI_REGISTER_UNREGISTER(perf);
DECLARE_SCMI_REGISTER_UNREGISTER(power);
DECLARE_SCMI_REGISTER_UNREGISTER(reset);
DECLARE_SCMI_REGISTER_UNREGISTER(sensors);
+DECLARE_SCMI_REGISTER_UNREGISTER(voltage);
DECLARE_SCMI_REGISTER_UNREGISTER(system);
#define DEFINE_SCMI_PROTOCOL_REGISTER_UNREGISTER(id, name) \
diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/driver.c b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/driver.c
index 3dfd8b6a0ebf..ada35e63feae 100644
--- a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/driver.c
+++ b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/driver.c
@@ -946,6 +946,7 @@ static int __init scmi_driver_init(void)
scmi_power_register();
scmi_reset_register();
scmi_sensors_register();
+ scmi_voltage_register();
scmi_system_register();
return platform_driver_register(&scmi_driver);
@@ -961,6 +962,7 @@ static void __exit scmi_driver_exit(void)
scmi_power_unregister();
scmi_reset_unregister();
scmi_sensors_unregister();
+ scmi_voltage_unregister();
scmi_system_unregister();
platform_driver_unregister(&scmi_driver);
diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/voltage.c b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/voltage.c
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..6b71589e0846
--- /dev/null
+++ b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/voltage.c
@@ -0,0 +1,397 @@
+// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
+/*
+ * System Control and Management Interface (SCMI) Voltage Protocol
+ *
+ * Copyright (C) 2020 ARM Ltd.
+ */
+
+#include <linux/scmi_protocol.h>
+
+#include "common.h"
+
+#define VOLTAGE_DOMS_NUM_MASK GENMASK(15, 0)
+#define REMAINING_LEVELS_MASK GENMASK(31, 16)
+#define RETURNED_LEVELS_MASK GENMASK(11, 0)
+
+enum scmi_voltage_protocol_cmd {
+ VOLTAGE_DOMAIN_ATTRIBUTES = 0x3,
+ VOLTAGE_DESCRIBE_LEVELS = 0x4,
+ VOLTAGE_CONFIG_SET = 0x5,
+ VOLTAGE_CONFIG_GET = 0x6,
+ VOLTAGE_LEVEL_SET = 0x7,
+ VOLTAGE_LEVEL_GET = 0x8,
+};
+
+struct scmi_msg_resp_protocol_attributes {
+ __le32 attr;
+#define NUM_VOLTAGE_DOMAINS(x) ((u16)(FIELD_GET(VOLTAGE_DOMS_NUM_MASK, (x))))
+};
+
+struct scmi_msg_resp_domain_attributes {
+ __le32 attr;
+ u8 name[SCMI_MAX_STR_SIZE];
+};
+
+struct scmi_msg_cmd_describe_levels {
+ __le32 domain_id;
+ __le32 level_index;
+};
+
+struct scmi_msg_resp_describe_levels {
+ __le32 flags;
+#define NUM_REMAINING_LEVELS(f) ((u16)(FIELD_GET(REMAINING_LEVELS_MASK, (f))))
+#define NUM_RETURNED_LEVELS(f) ((u16)(FIELD_GET(RETURNED_LEVELS_MASK, (f))))
+#define SUPPORTS_SEGMENTED_LEVELS(f) ((f) & BIT(12))
+ __le32 voltage[];
+};
+
+struct scmi_msg_cmd_config_set {
+ __le32 domain_id;
+ __le32 config;
+};
+
+struct scmi_msg_cmd_level_set {
+ __le32 domain_id;
+ __le32 flags;
+ __le32 voltage_level;
+};
+
+struct voltage_info {
+ unsigned int version;
+ unsigned int num_domains;
+ struct scmi_voltage_info **domains;
+};
+
+static int scmi_protocol_attributes_get(const struct scmi_handle *handle,
+ struct voltage_info *vinfo)
+{
+ int ret;
+ struct scmi_xfer *t;
+ struct scmi_msg_resp_protocol_attributes *resp;
+
+ ret = scmi_xfer_get_init(handle, PROTOCOL_ATTRIBUTES,
+ SCMI_PROTOCOL_VOLTAGE, 0, sizeof(*resp), &t);
+ if (ret)
+ return ret;
+
+ resp = t->rx.buf;
+ ret = scmi_do_xfer(handle, t);
+ if (!ret)
+ vinfo->num_domains =
+ NUM_VOLTAGE_DOMAINS(le32_to_cpu(resp->attr));
+
+ scmi_xfer_put(handle, t);
+ return ret;
+}
+
+static int scmi_init_voltage_levels(struct device *dev,
+ struct scmi_voltage_info *v,
+ u32 flags, u32 num_returned,
+ u32 num_remaining)
+{
+ bool segmented;
+ u32 num_levels;
+
+ segmented = SUPPORTS_SEGMENTED_LEVELS(flags);
+ num_levels = num_returned + num_remaining;
+ /*
+ * segmented levels entries are represented by a single triplet
+ * returned all in one go.
+ */
+ if (!num_levels ||
+ (segmented && (num_remaining || num_returned != 3))) {
+ dev_err(dev,
+ "Invalid level descriptor(%d/%d/%d) for voltage dom %d\n",
+ num_levels, num_returned, num_remaining, v->id);
+ return -EINVAL;
+ }
+
+ v->levels_uv = devm_kcalloc(dev, num_levels, sizeof(u32), GFP_KERNEL);
+ if (!v->levels_uv)
+ return -ENOMEM;
+
+ v->num_levels = num_levels;
+ v->segmented = segmented;
+
+ return 0;
+}
+
+static int scmi_voltage_descriptors_get(const struct scmi_handle *handle,
+ struct voltage_info *vinfo)
+{
+ int ret, dom;
+ struct scmi_xfer *td, *tl;
+ struct device *dev = handle->dev;
+ struct scmi_msg_resp_domain_attributes *resp_dom;
+ struct scmi_msg_resp_describe_levels *resp_levels;
+
+ ret = scmi_xfer_get_init(handle, VOLTAGE_DOMAIN_ATTRIBUTES,
+ SCMI_PROTOCOL_VOLTAGE, sizeof(__le32),
+ sizeof(*resp_dom), &td);
+ if (ret)
+ return ret;
+ resp_dom = td->rx.buf;
+
+ ret = scmi_xfer_get_init(handle, VOLTAGE_DESCRIBE_LEVELS,
+ SCMI_PROTOCOL_VOLTAGE, sizeof(__le64), 0, &tl);
+ if (ret)
+ goto outd;
+ resp_levels = tl->rx.buf;
+
+ for (dom = 0; dom < vinfo->num_domains; dom++) {
+ u32 desc_index = 0;
+ u16 num_returned = 0, num_remaining = 0;
+ struct scmi_msg_cmd_describe_levels *cmd;
+ struct scmi_voltage_info *v;
+
+ /* Retrieve domain attributes at first ... */
+ put_unaligned_le32(dom, td->tx.buf);
+ ret = scmi_do_xfer(handle, td);
+ /* Skip domain on comms error */
+ if (ret)
+ continue;
+
+ v = devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof(*v), GFP_KERNEL);
+ if (!v) {
+ ret = -ENOMEM;
+ break;
+ }
+
+ v->id = dom;
+ v->attributes = le32_to_cpu(resp_dom->attr);
+ strlcpy(v->name, resp_dom->name, SCMI_MAX_STR_SIZE);
+
+ cmd = tl->tx.buf;
+ /* ...then retrieve domain levels descriptions */
+ do {
+ u32 flags;
+ int cnt;
+
+ cmd->domain_id = cpu_to_le32(v->id);
+ cmd->level_index = desc_index;
+ ret = scmi_do_xfer(handle, tl);
+ if (ret)
+ break;
+
+ flags = le32_to_cpu(resp_levels->flags);
+ num_returned = NUM_RETURNED_LEVELS(flags);
+ num_remaining = NUM_REMAINING_LEVELS(flags);
+
+ /* Allocate space for num_levels if not already done */
+ if (!v->num_levels) {
+ ret = scmi_init_voltage_levels(dev, v, flags,
+ num_returned,
+ num_remaining);
+ if (ret)
+ break;
+ }
+
+ if (desc_index + num_returned > v->num_levels) {
+ dev_err(handle->dev,
+ "No. of voltage levels can't exceed %d\n",
+ v->num_levels);
+ ret = -EINVAL;
+ break;
+ }
+
+ for (cnt = 0; cnt < num_returned; cnt++) {
+ s32 val;
+
+ val =
+ (s32)le32_to_cpu(resp_levels->voltage[cnt]);
+ v->levels_uv[desc_index + cnt] = val;
+ if (val < 0)
+ v->negative_volts_allowed = true;
+ }
+
+ desc_index += num_returned;
+
+ scmi_reset_rx_to_maxsz(handle, tl);
+ /* check both to avoid infinite loop due to buggy fw */
+ } while (num_returned && num_remaining);
+
+ /*
+ * Bail out only on memory errors, just skip domain and free
+ * on any other error.
+ */
+ if (!ret) {
+ vinfo->domains[dom] = v;
+ } else if (ret != -ENOMEM) {
+ devm_kfree(dev, v->levels_uv);
+ devm_kfree(dev, v);
+ } else {
+ break;
+ }
+
+ scmi_reset_rx_to_maxsz(handle, td);
+ }
+
+ scmi_xfer_put(handle, tl);
+outd:
+ scmi_xfer_put(handle, td);
+
+ return ret;
+}
+
+static int __scmi_voltage_get_u32(const struct scmi_handle *handle,
+ u8 cmd_id, u32 domain_id, u32 *value)
+{
+ int ret;
+ struct scmi_xfer *t;
+ struct voltage_info *vinfo = handle->voltage_priv;
+
+ if (domain_id >= vinfo->num_domains)
+ return -EINVAL;
+
+ ret = scmi_xfer_get_init(handle, cmd_id,
+ SCMI_PROTOCOL_VOLTAGE,
+ sizeof(__le32), 0, &t);
+ if (ret)
+ return ret;
+
+ put_unaligned_le32(domain_id, t->tx.buf);
+ ret = scmi_do_xfer(handle, t);
+ if (!ret)
+ *value = get_unaligned_le32(t->rx.buf);
+
+ scmi_xfer_put(handle, t);
+ return ret;
+}
+
+static int scmi_voltage_config_set(const struct scmi_handle *handle,
+ u32 domain_id, u32 config)
+{
+ int ret;
+ struct scmi_xfer *t;
+ struct voltage_info *vinfo = handle->voltage_priv;
+ struct scmi_msg_cmd_config_set *cmd;
+
+ if (domain_id >= vinfo->num_domains)
+ return -EINVAL;
+
+ ret = scmi_xfer_get_init(handle, VOLTAGE_CONFIG_SET,
+ SCMI_PROTOCOL_VOLTAGE,
+ sizeof(*cmd), 0, &t);
+ if (ret)
+ return ret;
+
+ cmd = t->tx.buf;
+ cmd->domain_id = cpu_to_le32(domain_id);
+ cmd->config = cpu_to_le32(config & GENMASK(3, 0));
+
+ ret = scmi_do_xfer(handle, t);
+
+ scmi_xfer_put(handle, t);
+ return ret;
+}
+
+static int scmi_voltage_config_get(const struct scmi_handle *handle,
+ u32 domain_id, u32 *config)
+{
+ return __scmi_voltage_get_u32(handle, VOLTAGE_CONFIG_GET,
+ domain_id, config);
+}
+
+static int scmi_voltage_level_set(const struct scmi_handle *handle,
+ u32 domain_id, u32 flags, s32 volt_uV)
+{
+ int ret;
+ struct scmi_xfer *t;
+ struct voltage_info *vinfo = handle->voltage_priv;
+ struct scmi_msg_cmd_level_set *cmd;
+
+ if (domain_id >= vinfo->num_domains)
+ return -EINVAL;
+
+ ret = scmi_xfer_get_init(handle, VOLTAGE_LEVEL_SET,
+ SCMI_PROTOCOL_VOLTAGE,
+ sizeof(*cmd), 0, &t);
+ if (ret)
+ return ret;
+
+ cmd = t->tx.buf;
+ cmd->domain_id = cpu_to_le32(domain_id);
+ cmd->flags = cpu_to_le32(flags);
+ cmd->voltage_level = cpu_to_le32(volt_uV);
+
+ ret = scmi_do_xfer(handle, t);
+
+ scmi_xfer_put(handle, t);
+ return ret;
+}
+
+static int scmi_voltage_level_get(const struct scmi_handle *handle,
+ u32 domain_id, s32 *volt_uV)
+{
+ return __scmi_voltage_get_u32(handle, VOLTAGE_LEVEL_GET,
+ domain_id, (u32 *)volt_uV);
+}
+
+static const struct scmi_voltage_info * __must_check
+scmi_voltage_info_get(const struct scmi_handle *handle, u32 domain_id)
+{
+ struct voltage_info *vinfo = handle->voltage_priv;
+
+ if (domain_id >= vinfo->num_domains)
+ return NULL;
+
+ return vinfo->domains[domain_id];
+}
+
+static int scmi_voltage_domains_num_get(const struct scmi_handle *handle)
+{
+ struct voltage_info *vinfo = handle->voltage_priv;
+
+ return vinfo->num_domains;
+}
+
+static struct scmi_voltage_ops voltage_ops = {
+ .num_domains_get = scmi_voltage_domains_num_get,
+ .info_get = scmi_voltage_info_get,
+ .config_set = scmi_voltage_config_set,
+ .config_get = scmi_voltage_config_get,
+ .level_set = scmi_voltage_level_set,
+ .level_get = scmi_voltage_level_get,
+};
+
+static int scmi_voltage_protocol_init(struct scmi_handle *handle)
+{
+ int ret;
+ u32 version;
+ struct voltage_info *vinfo;
+
+ ret = scmi_version_get(handle, SCMI_PROTOCOL_VOLTAGE, &version);
+ if (ret)
+ return ret;
+
+ dev_dbg(handle->dev, "Voltage Version %d.%d\n",
+ PROTOCOL_REV_MAJOR(version), PROTOCOL_REV_MINOR(version));
+
+ vinfo = devm_kzalloc(handle->dev, sizeof(*vinfo), GFP_KERNEL);
+ if (!vinfo)
+ return -ENOMEM;
+ vinfo->version = version;
+
+ ret = scmi_protocol_attributes_get(handle, vinfo);
+ if (ret)
+ return ret;
+
+ if (vinfo->num_domains) {
+ vinfo->domains = devm_kcalloc(handle->dev, vinfo->num_domains,
+ sizeof(void *), GFP_KERNEL);
+ if (!vinfo->domains)
+ return -ENOMEM;
+ ret = scmi_voltage_descriptors_get(handle, vinfo);
+ if (ret)
+ return ret;
+ } else {
+ dev_warn(handle->dev, "No Voltage domains found.\n");
+ }
+
+ handle->voltage_ops = &voltage_ops;
+ handle->voltage_priv = vinfo;
+
+ return 0;
+}
+
+DEFINE_SCMI_PROTOCOL_REGISTER_UNREGISTER(SCMI_PROTOCOL_VOLTAGE, voltage)
diff --git a/include/linux/scmi_protocol.h b/include/linux/scmi_protocol.h
index 9cd312a1ff92..b11ca01e2393 100644
--- a/include/linux/scmi_protocol.h
+++ b/include/linux/scmi_protocol.h
@@ -209,6 +209,64 @@ struct scmi_reset_ops {
int (*deassert)(const struct scmi_handle *handle, u32 domain);
};
+/**
+ * struct scmi_voltage_info - describe one available SCMI Voltage Domain
+ *
+ * @id: the domain ID as advertised by the platform
+ * @segmented: defines the layout of the entries of array @levels_uv.
+ * - when True the entries are to be interpreted as triplets,
+ * each defining a segment representing a range of equally
+ * space voltages: <lowest_volts>, <highest_volt>, <step_uV>
+ * - when False the entries simply represent a single discrete
+ * supported voltage level
+ * @negative_volts_allowed: True if any of the entries of @levels_uv represent
+ * a negative voltage.
+ * @attributes: represents Voltage Domain advertised attributes
+ * @name: name assigned to the Voltage Domain by platform
+ * @num_levels: number of total entries in @levels_uv.
+ * @levels_uv: array of entries describing the available voltage levels for
+ * this domain.
+ */
+struct scmi_voltage_info {
+ unsigned int id;
+ bool segmented;
+ bool negative_volts_allowed;
+ unsigned int attributes;
+ char name[SCMI_MAX_STR_SIZE];
+ unsigned int num_levels;
+#define SCMI_VOLTAGE_SEGMENT_LOW 0
+#define SCMI_VOLTAGE_SEGMENT_HIGH 1
+#define SCMI_VOLTAGE_SEGMENT_STEP 2
+ int *levels_uv;
+};
+
+/**
+ * struct scmi_voltage_ops - represents the various operations provided
+ * by SCMI Voltage Protocol
+ *
+ * @num_domains_get: get the count of voltage domains provided by SCMI
+ * @info_get: get the information of the specified domain
+ * @config_set: set the config for the specified domain
+ * @config_get: get the config of the specified domain
+ * @level_set: set the voltage level for the specified domain
+ * @level_get: get the voltage level of the specified domain
+ */
+struct scmi_voltage_ops {
+ int (*num_domains_get)(const struct scmi_handle *handle);
+ const struct scmi_voltage_info __must_check *(*info_get)
+ (const struct scmi_handle *handle, u32 domain_id);
+ int (*config_set)(const struct scmi_handle *handle, u32 domain_id,
+ u32 config);
+#define SCMI_VOLTAGE_ARCH_STATE_OFF 0x0
+#define SCMI_VOLTAGE_ARCH_STATE_ON 0x7
+ int (*config_get)(const struct scmi_handle *handle, u32 domain_id,
+ u32 *config);
+ int (*level_set)(const struct scmi_handle *handle, u32 domain_id,
+ u32 flags, s32 volt_uV);
+ int (*level_get)(const struct scmi_handle *handle, u32 domain_id,
+ s32 *volt_uV);
+};
+
/**
* struct scmi_notify_ops - represents notifications' operations provided by
* SCMI core
@@ -262,6 +320,7 @@ struct scmi_notify_ops {
* @clk_ops: pointer to set of clock protocol operations
* @sensor_ops: pointer to set of sensor protocol operations
* @reset_ops: pointer to set of reset protocol operations
+ * @voltage_ops: pointer to set of voltage protocol operations
* @notify_ops: pointer to set of notifications related operations
* @perf_priv: pointer to private data structure specific to performance
* protocol(for internal use only)
@@ -273,6 +332,8 @@ struct scmi_notify_ops {
* protocol(for internal use only)
* @reset_priv: pointer to private data structure specific to reset
* protocol(for internal use only)
+ * @voltage_priv: pointer to private data structure specific to voltage
+ * protocol(for internal use only)
* @notify_priv: pointer to private data structure specific to notifications
* (for internal use only)
*/
@@ -284,6 +345,7 @@ struct scmi_handle {
const struct scmi_power_ops *power_ops;
const struct scmi_sensor_ops *sensor_ops;
const struct scmi_reset_ops *reset_ops;
+ const struct scmi_voltage_ops *voltage_ops;
const struct scmi_notify_ops *notify_ops;
/* for protocol internal use */
void *perf_priv;
@@ -291,6 +353,7 @@ struct scmi_handle {
void *power_priv;
void *sensor_priv;
void *reset_priv;
+ void *voltage_priv;
void *notify_priv;
void *system_priv;
};
@@ -303,6 +366,7 @@ enum scmi_std_protocol {
SCMI_PROTOCOL_CLOCK = 0x14,
SCMI_PROTOCOL_SENSOR = 0x15,
SCMI_PROTOCOL_RESET = 0x16,
+ SCMI_PROTOCOL_VOLTAGE = 0x17,
};
enum scmi_system_events {
--
2.17.1
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH v5 1/5] firmware: arm_scmi: Add Voltage Domain Support
2020-11-17 12:34 ` [PATCH v5 1/5] firmware: arm_scmi: Add Voltage Domain Support Cristian Marussi
@ 2020-11-19 16:08 ` Sudeep Holla
2020-11-19 19:01 ` Cristian Marussi
0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: Sudeep Holla @ 2020-11-19 16:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Cristian Marussi
Cc: linux-kernel, linux-arm-kernel, devicetree, lukasz.luba,
Jonathan.Cameron, broonie, robh, satyakim, etienne.carriere,
f.fainelli, vincent.guittot, souvik.chakravarty
On Tue, Nov 17, 2020 at 12:34:11PM +0000, Cristian Marussi wrote:
> Add SCMI Voltage Domain protocol support.
>
> Signed-off-by: Cristian Marussi <cristian.marussi@arm.com>
> ---
> v4 --> v5
> - removed inline
> - moved segmented intervals defines
> - fixed some macros complaints by checkpatch
>
> v3 --> v4
> - avoid fixed sized typing in voltage_info
> - avoid coccinelle falde complaints about pointer-sized allocations
>
> v2 --> v3
> - restrict segmented voltage domain descriptors to one triplet
> - removed unneeded inline
> - free allocated resources for invalid voltage domain
> - added __must_check to info_get voltage operations
> - added a few comments
> - removed fixed size typing from struct voltage_info
>
> v1 --> v2
> - fix voltage levels query loop to reload full cmd description
> between iterations as reported by Etienne Carriere
> - ensure rx buffer is properly sized calli scmi_reset_rx_to_maxsz
> between transfers
> ---
> drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/Makefile | 2 +-
> drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/common.h | 1 +
> drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/driver.c | 2 +
> drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/voltage.c | 397 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> include/linux/scmi_protocol.h | 64 +++++
> 5 files changed, 465 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> create mode 100644 drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/voltage.c
>
> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/Makefile b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/Makefile
> index bc0d54f8e861..6a2ef63306d6 100644
> --- a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/Makefile
> +++ b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/Makefile
> @@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ scmi-driver-y = driver.o notify.o
> scmi-transport-y = shmem.o
> scmi-transport-$(CONFIG_MAILBOX) += mailbox.o
> scmi-transport-$(CONFIG_HAVE_ARM_SMCCC_DISCOVERY) += smc.o
> -scmi-protocols-y = base.o clock.o perf.o power.o reset.o sensors.o system.o
> +scmi-protocols-y = base.o clock.o perf.o power.o reset.o sensors.o system.o voltage.o
> scmi-module-objs := $(scmi-bus-y) $(scmi-driver-y) $(scmi-protocols-y) \
> $(scmi-transport-y)
> obj-$(CONFIG_ARM_SCMI_PROTOCOL) += scmi-module.o
> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/common.h b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/common.h
> index 65063fa948d4..c0fb45e7c3e8 100644
> --- a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/common.h
> +++ b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/common.h
> @@ -169,6 +169,7 @@ DECLARE_SCMI_REGISTER_UNREGISTER(perf);
> DECLARE_SCMI_REGISTER_UNREGISTER(power);
> DECLARE_SCMI_REGISTER_UNREGISTER(reset);
> DECLARE_SCMI_REGISTER_UNREGISTER(sensors);
> +DECLARE_SCMI_REGISTER_UNREGISTER(voltage);
> DECLARE_SCMI_REGISTER_UNREGISTER(system);
>
> #define DEFINE_SCMI_PROTOCOL_REGISTER_UNREGISTER(id, name) \
> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/driver.c b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/driver.c
> index 3dfd8b6a0ebf..ada35e63feae 100644
> --- a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/driver.c
> +++ b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/driver.c
> @@ -946,6 +946,7 @@ static int __init scmi_driver_init(void)
> scmi_power_register();
> scmi_reset_register();
> scmi_sensors_register();
> + scmi_voltage_register();
> scmi_system_register();
>
> return platform_driver_register(&scmi_driver);
> @@ -961,6 +962,7 @@ static void __exit scmi_driver_exit(void)
> scmi_power_unregister();
> scmi_reset_unregister();
> scmi_sensors_unregister();
> + scmi_voltage_unregister();
> scmi_system_unregister();
>
> platform_driver_unregister(&scmi_driver);
> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/voltage.c b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/voltage.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 000000000000..6b71589e0846
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/voltage.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,397 @@
> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> +/*
> + * System Control and Management Interface (SCMI) Voltage Protocol
> + *
> + * Copyright (C) 2020 ARM Ltd.
> + */
> +
> +#include <linux/scmi_protocol.h>
> +
> +#include "common.h"
> +
> +#define VOLTAGE_DOMS_NUM_MASK GENMASK(15, 0)
> +#define REMAINING_LEVELS_MASK GENMASK(31, 16)
> +#define RETURNED_LEVELS_MASK GENMASK(11, 0)
> +
> +enum scmi_voltage_protocol_cmd {
> + VOLTAGE_DOMAIN_ATTRIBUTES = 0x3,
> + VOLTAGE_DESCRIBE_LEVELS = 0x4,
> + VOLTAGE_CONFIG_SET = 0x5,
> + VOLTAGE_CONFIG_GET = 0x6,
> + VOLTAGE_LEVEL_SET = 0x7,
> + VOLTAGE_LEVEL_GET = 0x8,
> +};
> +
> +struct scmi_msg_resp_protocol_attributes {
> + __le32 attr;
> +#define NUM_VOLTAGE_DOMAINS(x) ((u16)(FIELD_GET(VOLTAGE_DOMS_NUM_MASK, (x))))
> +};
> +
Sorry but same annoying comment again, drop one element structures.
> +struct scmi_msg_resp_domain_attributes {
> + __le32 attr;
> + u8 name[SCMI_MAX_STR_SIZE];
> +};
> +
> +struct scmi_msg_cmd_describe_levels {
> + __le32 domain_id;
> + __le32 level_index;
> +};
> +
> +struct scmi_msg_resp_describe_levels {
> + __le32 flags;
> +#define NUM_REMAINING_LEVELS(f) ((u16)(FIELD_GET(REMAINING_LEVELS_MASK, (f))))
> +#define NUM_RETURNED_LEVELS(f) ((u16)(FIELD_GET(RETURNED_LEVELS_MASK, (f))))
> +#define SUPPORTS_SEGMENTED_LEVELS(f) ((f) & BIT(12))
> + __le32 voltage[];
> +};
> +
> +struct scmi_msg_cmd_config_set {
> + __le32 domain_id;
> + __le32 config;
> +};
> +
> +struct scmi_msg_cmd_level_set {
> + __le32 domain_id;
> + __le32 flags;
> + __le32 voltage_level;
> +};
> +
> +struct voltage_info {
> + unsigned int version;
> + unsigned int num_domains;
> + struct scmi_voltage_info **domains;
> +};
> +
> +static int scmi_protocol_attributes_get(const struct scmi_handle *handle,
> + struct voltage_info *vinfo)
> +{
> + int ret;
> + struct scmi_xfer *t;
> + struct scmi_msg_resp_protocol_attributes *resp;
> +
> + ret = scmi_xfer_get_init(handle, PROTOCOL_ATTRIBUTES,
> + SCMI_PROTOCOL_VOLTAGE, 0, sizeof(*resp), &t);
> + if (ret)
> + return ret;
> +
> + resp = t->rx.buf;
> + ret = scmi_do_xfer(handle, t);
> + if (!ret)
> + vinfo->num_domains =
> + NUM_VOLTAGE_DOMAINS(le32_to_cpu(resp->attr));
> +
> + scmi_xfer_put(handle, t);
> + return ret;
> +}
> +
> +static int scmi_init_voltage_levels(struct device *dev,
> + struct scmi_voltage_info *v,
> + u32 flags, u32 num_returned,
> + u32 num_remaining)
> +{
> + bool segmented;
> + u32 num_levels;
> +
Why can't you pass the above 2 directly from the caller to this function
since they are just used to obtain them here.
[...]
> +static int scmi_voltage_descriptors_get(const struct scmi_handle *handle,
> + struct voltage_info *vinfo)
> +{
> + int ret, dom;
> + struct scmi_xfer *td, *tl;
> + struct device *dev = handle->dev;
> + struct scmi_msg_resp_domain_attributes *resp_dom;
> + struct scmi_msg_resp_describe_levels *resp_levels;
> +
> + ret = scmi_xfer_get_init(handle, VOLTAGE_DOMAIN_ATTRIBUTES,
> + SCMI_PROTOCOL_VOLTAGE, sizeof(__le32),
> + sizeof(*resp_dom), &td);
> + if (ret)
> + return ret;
> + resp_dom = td->rx.buf;
> +
> + ret = scmi_xfer_get_init(handle, VOLTAGE_DESCRIBE_LEVELS,
> + SCMI_PROTOCOL_VOLTAGE, sizeof(__le64), 0, &tl);
> + if (ret)
> + goto outd;
> + resp_levels = tl->rx.buf;
> +
> + for (dom = 0; dom < vinfo->num_domains; dom++) {
> + u32 desc_index = 0;
> + u16 num_returned = 0, num_remaining = 0;
> + struct scmi_msg_cmd_describe_levels *cmd;
> + struct scmi_voltage_info *v;
> +
> + /* Retrieve domain attributes at first ... */
> + put_unaligned_le32(dom, td->tx.buf);
> + ret = scmi_do_xfer(handle, td);
> + /* Skip domain on comms error */
> + if (ret)
> + continue;
> +
> + v = devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof(*v), GFP_KERNEL);
> + if (!v) {
> + ret = -ENOMEM;
> + break;
> + }
> +
Why can't we allocate vinfo->domains real structure instead of pointers
and indirection there ? I understand that it helps to manage holes easily
but I think that would simplify the dynamic allocation and error handling.
It doesn't have to be this complicated(not much but still) IMO.
May be scmi_voltage_info_get can use num_levels to either return NULL
or vinfo->domains[domain_id] ?
Regards,
Sudeep
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH v5 1/5] firmware: arm_scmi: Add Voltage Domain Support
2020-11-19 16:08 ` Sudeep Holla
@ 2020-11-19 19:01 ` Cristian Marussi
0 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: Cristian Marussi @ 2020-11-19 19:01 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Sudeep Holla
Cc: linux-kernel, linux-arm-kernel, devicetree, lukasz.luba,
Jonathan.Cameron, broonie, robh, satyakim, etienne.carriere,
f.fainelli, vincent.guittot, souvik.chakravarty
Hi Sudeep
thanks for reviewing.
On Thu, Nov 19, 2020 at 04:08:24PM +0000, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 17, 2020 at 12:34:11PM +0000, Cristian Marussi wrote:
> > Add SCMI Voltage Domain protocol support.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Cristian Marussi <cristian.marussi@arm.com>
> > ---
> > v4 --> v5
> > - removed inline
> > - moved segmented intervals defines
> > - fixed some macros complaints by checkpatch
> >
> > v3 --> v4
> > - avoid fixed sized typing in voltage_info
> > - avoid coccinelle falde complaints about pointer-sized allocations
> >
> > v2 --> v3
> > - restrict segmented voltage domain descriptors to one triplet
> > - removed unneeded inline
> > - free allocated resources for invalid voltage domain
> > - added __must_check to info_get voltage operations
> > - added a few comments
> > - removed fixed size typing from struct voltage_info
> >
> > v1 --> v2
> > - fix voltage levels query loop to reload full cmd description
> > between iterations as reported by Etienne Carriere
> > - ensure rx buffer is properly sized calli scmi_reset_rx_to_maxsz
> > between transfers
> > ---
> > drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/Makefile | 2 +-
> > drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/common.h | 1 +
> > drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/driver.c | 2 +
> > drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/voltage.c | 397 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > include/linux/scmi_protocol.h | 64 +++++
> > 5 files changed, 465 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > create mode 100644 drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/voltage.c
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/Makefile b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/Makefile
> > index bc0d54f8e861..6a2ef63306d6 100644
> > --- a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/Makefile
> > +++ b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/Makefile
> > @@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ scmi-driver-y = driver.o notify.o
> > scmi-transport-y = shmem.o
> > scmi-transport-$(CONFIG_MAILBOX) += mailbox.o
> > scmi-transport-$(CONFIG_HAVE_ARM_SMCCC_DISCOVERY) += smc.o
> > -scmi-protocols-y = base.o clock.o perf.o power.o reset.o sensors.o system.o
> > +scmi-protocols-y = base.o clock.o perf.o power.o reset.o sensors.o system.o voltage.o
> > scmi-module-objs := $(scmi-bus-y) $(scmi-driver-y) $(scmi-protocols-y) \
> > $(scmi-transport-y)
> > obj-$(CONFIG_ARM_SCMI_PROTOCOL) += scmi-module.o
> > diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/common.h b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/common.h
> > index 65063fa948d4..c0fb45e7c3e8 100644
> > --- a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/common.h
> > +++ b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/common.h
> > @@ -169,6 +169,7 @@ DECLARE_SCMI_REGISTER_UNREGISTER(perf);
> > DECLARE_SCMI_REGISTER_UNREGISTER(power);
> > DECLARE_SCMI_REGISTER_UNREGISTER(reset);
> > DECLARE_SCMI_REGISTER_UNREGISTER(sensors);
> > +DECLARE_SCMI_REGISTER_UNREGISTER(voltage);
> > DECLARE_SCMI_REGISTER_UNREGISTER(system);
> >
> > #define DEFINE_SCMI_PROTOCOL_REGISTER_UNREGISTER(id, name) \
> > diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/driver.c b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/driver.c
> > index 3dfd8b6a0ebf..ada35e63feae 100644
> > --- a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/driver.c
> > +++ b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/driver.c
> > @@ -946,6 +946,7 @@ static int __init scmi_driver_init(void)
> > scmi_power_register();
> > scmi_reset_register();
> > scmi_sensors_register();
> > + scmi_voltage_register();
> > scmi_system_register();
> >
> > return platform_driver_register(&scmi_driver);
> > @@ -961,6 +962,7 @@ static void __exit scmi_driver_exit(void)
> > scmi_power_unregister();
> > scmi_reset_unregister();
> > scmi_sensors_unregister();
> > + scmi_voltage_unregister();
> > scmi_system_unregister();
> >
> > platform_driver_unregister(&scmi_driver);
> > diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/voltage.c b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/voltage.c
> > new file mode 100644
> > index 000000000000..6b71589e0846
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/voltage.c
> > @@ -0,0 +1,397 @@
> > +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> > +/*
> > + * System Control and Management Interface (SCMI) Voltage Protocol
> > + *
> > + * Copyright (C) 2020 ARM Ltd.
> > + */
> > +
> > +#include <linux/scmi_protocol.h>
> > +
> > +#include "common.h"
> > +
> > +#define VOLTAGE_DOMS_NUM_MASK GENMASK(15, 0)
> > +#define REMAINING_LEVELS_MASK GENMASK(31, 16)
> > +#define RETURNED_LEVELS_MASK GENMASK(11, 0)
> > +
> > +enum scmi_voltage_protocol_cmd {
> > + VOLTAGE_DOMAIN_ATTRIBUTES = 0x3,
> > + VOLTAGE_DESCRIBE_LEVELS = 0x4,
> > + VOLTAGE_CONFIG_SET = 0x5,
> > + VOLTAGE_CONFIG_GET = 0x6,
> > + VOLTAGE_LEVEL_SET = 0x7,
> > + VOLTAGE_LEVEL_GET = 0x8,
> > +};
> > +
> > +struct scmi_msg_resp_protocol_attributes {
> > + __le32 attr;
> > +#define NUM_VOLTAGE_DOMAINS(x) ((u16)(FIELD_GET(VOLTAGE_DOMS_NUM_MASK, (x))))
> > +};
> > +
>
> Sorry but same annoying comment again, drop one element structures.
>
I'll do.
> > +struct scmi_msg_resp_domain_attributes {
> > + __le32 attr;
> > + u8 name[SCMI_MAX_STR_SIZE];
> > +};
> > +
> > +struct scmi_msg_cmd_describe_levels {
> > + __le32 domain_id;
> > + __le32 level_index;
> > +};
> > +
> > +struct scmi_msg_resp_describe_levels {
> > + __le32 flags;
> > +#define NUM_REMAINING_LEVELS(f) ((u16)(FIELD_GET(REMAINING_LEVELS_MASK, (f))))
> > +#define NUM_RETURNED_LEVELS(f) ((u16)(FIELD_GET(RETURNED_LEVELS_MASK, (f))))
> > +#define SUPPORTS_SEGMENTED_LEVELS(f) ((f) & BIT(12))
> > + __le32 voltage[];
> > +};
> > +
> > +struct scmi_msg_cmd_config_set {
> > + __le32 domain_id;
> > + __le32 config;
> > +};
> > +
> > +struct scmi_msg_cmd_level_set {
> > + __le32 domain_id;
> > + __le32 flags;
> > + __le32 voltage_level;
> > +};
> > +
> > +struct voltage_info {
> > + unsigned int version;
> > + unsigned int num_domains;
> > + struct scmi_voltage_info **domains;
> > +};
> > +
> > +static int scmi_protocol_attributes_get(const struct scmi_handle *handle,
> > + struct voltage_info *vinfo)
> > +{
> > + int ret;
> > + struct scmi_xfer *t;
> > + struct scmi_msg_resp_protocol_attributes *resp;
> > +
> > + ret = scmi_xfer_get_init(handle, PROTOCOL_ATTRIBUTES,
> > + SCMI_PROTOCOL_VOLTAGE, 0, sizeof(*resp), &t);
> > + if (ret)
> > + return ret;
> > +
> > + resp = t->rx.buf;
> > + ret = scmi_do_xfer(handle, t);
> > + if (!ret)
> > + vinfo->num_domains =
> > + NUM_VOLTAGE_DOMAINS(le32_to_cpu(resp->attr));
> > +
> > + scmi_xfer_put(handle, t);
> > + return ret;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static int scmi_init_voltage_levels(struct device *dev,
> > + struct scmi_voltage_info *v,
> > + u32 flags, u32 num_returned,
> > + u32 num_remaining)
> > +{
> > + bool segmented;
> > + u32 num_levels;
> > +
>
> Why can't you pass the above 2 directly from the caller to this function
> since they are just used to obtain them here.
>
I can and I'll do for segmented, num_levels I need to have it split in
returned and remaining here to check the holy triplet is fine.
(assuming I want to keep all the checkery inside this func)
>
> [...]
>
> > +static int scmi_voltage_descriptors_get(const struct scmi_handle *handle,
> > + struct voltage_info *vinfo)
> > +{
> > + int ret, dom;
> > + struct scmi_xfer *td, *tl;
> > + struct device *dev = handle->dev;
> > + struct scmi_msg_resp_domain_attributes *resp_dom;
> > + struct scmi_msg_resp_describe_levels *resp_levels;
> > +
> > + ret = scmi_xfer_get_init(handle, VOLTAGE_DOMAIN_ATTRIBUTES,
> > + SCMI_PROTOCOL_VOLTAGE, sizeof(__le32),
> > + sizeof(*resp_dom), &td);
> > + if (ret)
> > + return ret;
> > + resp_dom = td->rx.buf;
> > +
> > + ret = scmi_xfer_get_init(handle, VOLTAGE_DESCRIBE_LEVELS,
> > + SCMI_PROTOCOL_VOLTAGE, sizeof(__le64), 0, &tl);
> > + if (ret)
> > + goto outd;
> > + resp_levels = tl->rx.buf;
> > +
> > + for (dom = 0; dom < vinfo->num_domains; dom++) {
> > + u32 desc_index = 0;
> > + u16 num_returned = 0, num_remaining = 0;
> > + struct scmi_msg_cmd_describe_levels *cmd;
> > + struct scmi_voltage_info *v;
> > +
> > + /* Retrieve domain attributes at first ... */
> > + put_unaligned_le32(dom, td->tx.buf);
> > + ret = scmi_do_xfer(handle, td);
> > + /* Skip domain on comms error */
> > + if (ret)
> > + continue;
> > +
> > + v = devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof(*v), GFP_KERNEL);
> > + if (!v) {
> > + ret = -ENOMEM;
> > + break;
> > + }
> > +
>
> Why can't we allocate vinfo->domains real structure instead of pointers
> and indirection there ? I understand that it helps to manage holes easily
> but I think that would simplify the dynamic allocation and error handling.
> It doesn't have to be this complicated(not much but still) IMO.
>
> May be scmi_voltage_info_get can use num_levels to either return NULL
> or vinfo->domains[domain_id] ?
>
Yes it was for the holes, but I'll do allocating contiguously and
checking on num_levels != 0 as you suggested
Thanks
Cristian
> Regards,
> Sudeep
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v5 2/5] firmware: arm_scmi: add SCMI Voltage Domain devname
2020-11-17 12:34 [PATCH v5 0/5] Add support for SCMIv3.0 Voltage Domain Protocol and SCMI-Regulator Cristian Marussi
2020-11-17 12:34 ` [PATCH v5 1/5] firmware: arm_scmi: Add Voltage Domain Support Cristian Marussi
@ 2020-11-17 12:34 ` Cristian Marussi
2020-11-17 12:34 ` [PATCH v5 3/5] regulator: core: add of_match_full_name boolean flag Cristian Marussi
` (2 subsequent siblings)
4 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: Cristian Marussi @ 2020-11-17 12:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-kernel, linux-arm-kernel, devicetree
Cc: sudeep.holla, lukasz.luba, Jonathan.Cameron, broonie, robh,
satyakim, etienne.carriere, f.fainelli, vincent.guittot,
souvik.chakravarty, cristian.marussi
Add SCMI Voltage Domain device name to the core list of supported protocol
devices.
Signed-off-by: Cristian Marussi <cristian.marussi@arm.com>
---
drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/driver.c | 1 +
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/driver.c b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/driver.c
index ada35e63feae..5392e1fc6b4e 100644
--- a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/driver.c
+++ b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/driver.c
@@ -743,6 +743,7 @@ static struct scmi_prot_devnames devnames[] = {
{ SCMI_PROTOCOL_CLOCK, { "clocks" },},
{ SCMI_PROTOCOL_SENSOR, { "hwmon" },},
{ SCMI_PROTOCOL_RESET, { "reset" },},
+ { SCMI_PROTOCOL_VOLTAGE, { "regulator" },},
};
static inline void
--
2.17.1
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread* [PATCH v5 3/5] regulator: core: add of_match_full_name boolean flag
2020-11-17 12:34 [PATCH v5 0/5] Add support for SCMIv3.0 Voltage Domain Protocol and SCMI-Regulator Cristian Marussi
2020-11-17 12:34 ` [PATCH v5 1/5] firmware: arm_scmi: Add Voltage Domain Support Cristian Marussi
2020-11-17 12:34 ` [PATCH v5 2/5] firmware: arm_scmi: add SCMI Voltage Domain devname Cristian Marussi
@ 2020-11-17 12:34 ` Cristian Marussi
2020-11-17 12:34 ` [PATCH v5 4/5] regulator: add SCMI driver Cristian Marussi
2020-11-17 12:34 ` [PATCH v5 5/5] dt-bindings: arm: add support for SCMI Regulators Cristian Marussi
4 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: Cristian Marussi @ 2020-11-17 12:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-kernel, linux-arm-kernel, devicetree
Cc: sudeep.holla, lukasz.luba, Jonathan.Cameron, broonie, robh,
satyakim, etienne.carriere, f.fainelli, vincent.guittot,
souvik.chakravarty, cristian.marussi
During regulators registration, if .of_match and .regulators_node are
defined as non-null strings in struct regulator_desc the core searches the
DT subtree rooted at .regulators_node trying to match, at first, .of_match
against the 'regulator-compatible' property and, then, falling back to use
the name of the node itself to determine a good match.
Property 'regulator-compatible', though, is now deprecated and falling back
to match against the node name, works fine only as long as the involved
nodes are named in an unique way across the searched subtree; if that's not
the case, like when using <common-name>@<unit> style naming for properties
indexed via 'reg' property (as advised by the standard), the above matching
mechanism based on the simple common name will lead to multiple matches and
the only viable alternative would be to properly define the now deprecated
'regulator-compatible' as the node full name, i.e. <common-name>@<unit>.
In order to address this case without using such deprecated binding, define
a new boolean flag .of_match_full_name in struct regulator_desc to force
the core to match against the node full-name instead of the plain name.
Signed-off-by: Cristian Marussi <cristian.marussi@arm.com>
---
drivers/regulator/of_regulator.c | 8 ++++++--
include/linux/regulator/driver.h | 3 +++
2 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/regulator/of_regulator.c b/drivers/regulator/of_regulator.c
index 06c0b15fe4c0..564f928eb1db 100644
--- a/drivers/regulator/of_regulator.c
+++ b/drivers/regulator/of_regulator.c
@@ -413,8 +413,12 @@ device_node *regulator_of_get_init_node(struct device *dev,
for_each_available_child_of_node(search, child) {
name = of_get_property(child, "regulator-compatible", NULL);
- if (!name)
- name = child->name;
+ if (!name) {
+ if (!desc->of_match_full_name)
+ name = child->name;
+ else
+ name = child->full_name;
+ }
if (!strcmp(desc->of_match, name)) {
of_node_put(search);
diff --git a/include/linux/regulator/driver.h b/include/linux/regulator/driver.h
index 11cade73726c..d7c77ee370f3 100644
--- a/include/linux/regulator/driver.h
+++ b/include/linux/regulator/driver.h
@@ -223,6 +223,8 @@ enum regulator_type {
* @name: Identifying name for the regulator.
* @supply_name: Identifying the regulator supply
* @of_match: Name used to identify regulator in DT.
+ * @of_match_full_name: A flag to indicate that the of_match string, if
+ * present, should be matched against the node full_name.
* @regulators_node: Name of node containing regulator definitions in DT.
* @of_parse_cb: Optional callback called only if of_match is present.
* Will be called for each regulator parsed from DT, during
@@ -314,6 +316,7 @@ struct regulator_desc {
const char *name;
const char *supply_name;
const char *of_match;
+ bool of_match_full_name;
const char *regulators_node;
int (*of_parse_cb)(struct device_node *,
const struct regulator_desc *,
--
2.17.1
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread* [PATCH v5 4/5] regulator: add SCMI driver
2020-11-17 12:34 [PATCH v5 0/5] Add support for SCMIv3.0 Voltage Domain Protocol and SCMI-Regulator Cristian Marussi
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2020-11-17 12:34 ` [PATCH v5 3/5] regulator: core: add of_match_full_name boolean flag Cristian Marussi
@ 2020-11-17 12:34 ` Cristian Marussi
2020-11-19 16:13 ` Sudeep Holla
2020-11-17 12:34 ` [PATCH v5 5/5] dt-bindings: arm: add support for SCMI Regulators Cristian Marussi
4 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: Cristian Marussi @ 2020-11-17 12:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-kernel, linux-arm-kernel, devicetree
Cc: sudeep.holla, lukasz.luba, Jonathan.Cameron, broonie, robh,
satyakim, etienne.carriere, f.fainelli, vincent.guittot,
souvik.chakravarty, cristian.marussi
Add a simple regulator based on SCMI Voltage Domain Protocol.
Signed-off-by: Cristian Marussi <cristian.marussi@arm.com>
----
v3 --> v4
- using of_match_full_name core regulator flag
- avoid coccinelle falde complaints about pointer-sized allocations
v2 --> v3
- remove multiple linear mappings support
- removed duplicated voltage name printout
- added a few comments
- simplified return path in scmi_reg_set_voltage_sel()
v1 --> v2
- removed duplicate regulator naming
- removed redundant .get/set_voltage ops: only _sel variants implemented
- removed condexpr on fail path to increase readability
v0 --> v1
- fixed init_data constraint parsing
- fixes for v5.8 (linear_range.h)
- fixed commit message content and subject line format
- factored out SCMI core specific changes to distinct patch
- reworked Kconfig and Makefile to keep proper alphabetic order
- fixed SPDX comment style
- removed unneeded inline functions
- reworked conditionals for legibility
- fixed some return paths to properly report SCMI original errors codes
- added some more descriptive error messages when fw returns invalid ranges
- removed unneeded explicit devm_regulator_unregister from .remove()
---
drivers/regulator/Kconfig | 9 +
drivers/regulator/Makefile | 1 +
drivers/regulator/scmi-regulator.c | 409 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
3 files changed, 419 insertions(+)
create mode 100644 drivers/regulator/scmi-regulator.c
diff --git a/drivers/regulator/Kconfig b/drivers/regulator/Kconfig
index 020a00d6696b..5617c56fbe9b 100644
--- a/drivers/regulator/Kconfig
+++ b/drivers/regulator/Kconfig
@@ -155,6 +155,15 @@ config REGULATOR_ARIZONA_MICSUPP
and Wolfson Microelectronic Arizona codecs
devices.
+config REGULATOR_ARM_SCMI
+ tristate "SCMI based regulator driver"
+ depends on ARM_SCMI_PROTOCOL && OF
+ help
+ This adds the regulator driver support for ARM platforms using SCMI
+ protocol for device voltage management.
+ This driver uses SCMI Message Protocol driver to interact with the
+ firmware providing the device Voltage functionality.
+
config REGULATOR_AS3711
tristate "AS3711 PMIC"
depends on MFD_AS3711
diff --git a/drivers/regulator/Makefile b/drivers/regulator/Makefile
index 6ebae516258e..aeed0b6079b2 100644
--- a/drivers/regulator/Makefile
+++ b/drivers/regulator/Makefile
@@ -24,6 +24,7 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_REGULATOR_AD5398) += ad5398.o
obj-$(CONFIG_REGULATOR_ANATOP) += anatop-regulator.o
obj-$(CONFIG_REGULATOR_ARIZONA_LDO1) += arizona-ldo1.o
obj-$(CONFIG_REGULATOR_ARIZONA_MICSUPP) += arizona-micsupp.o
+obj-$(CONFIG_REGULATOR_ARM_SCMI) += scmi-regulator.o
obj-$(CONFIG_REGULATOR_AS3711) += as3711-regulator.o
obj-$(CONFIG_REGULATOR_AS3722) += as3722-regulator.o
obj-$(CONFIG_REGULATOR_AXP20X) += axp20x-regulator.o
diff --git a/drivers/regulator/scmi-regulator.c b/drivers/regulator/scmi-regulator.c
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..536458669b07
--- /dev/null
+++ b/drivers/regulator/scmi-regulator.c
@@ -0,0 +1,409 @@
+// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
+//
+// System Control and Management Interface (SCMI) based regulator driver
+//
+// Copyright (C) 2020 ARM Ltd.
+//
+// Implements a regulator driver on top of the SCMI Voltage Protocol.
+//
+// The ARM SCMI Protocol aims in general to hide as much as possible all the
+// underlying operational details while providing an abstracted interface for
+// its users to operate upon: as a consequence the resulting operational
+// capabilities and configurability of this regulator device are much more
+// limited than the ones usually available on a standard physical regulator.
+//
+// The supported SCMI regulator ops are restricted to the bare minimum:
+//
+// - 'status_ops': enable/disable/is_enabled
+// - 'voltage_ops': get_voltage_sel/set_voltage_sel
+// list_voltage/map_voltage
+//
+// Each SCMI regulator instance is associated, through the means of a proper DT
+// entry description, to a specific SCMI Voltage Domain.
+
+#define pr_fmt(fmt) KBUILD_MODNAME ": " fmt
+
+#include <linux/linear_range.h>
+#include <linux/module.h>
+#include <linux/of.h>
+#include <linux/regulator/driver.h>
+#include <linux/regulator/machine.h>
+#include <linux/regulator/of_regulator.h>
+#include <linux/scmi_protocol.h>
+#include <linux/slab.h>
+#include <linux/types.h>
+
+struct scmi_regulator {
+ u32 id;
+ struct scmi_device *sdev;
+ struct regulator_dev *rdev;
+ struct device_node *of_node;
+ struct regulator_desc desc;
+ struct regulator_config conf;
+};
+
+struct scmi_regulator_info {
+ int num_doms;
+ struct scmi_regulator **sregv;
+};
+
+static int scmi_reg_enable(struct regulator_dev *rdev)
+{
+ struct scmi_regulator *sreg = rdev_get_drvdata(rdev);
+ const struct scmi_handle *handle = sreg->sdev->handle;
+
+ return handle->voltage_ops->config_set(handle, sreg->id,
+ SCMI_VOLTAGE_ARCH_STATE_ON);
+}
+
+static int scmi_reg_disable(struct regulator_dev *rdev)
+{
+ struct scmi_regulator *sreg = rdev_get_drvdata(rdev);
+ const struct scmi_handle *handle = sreg->sdev->handle;
+
+ return handle->voltage_ops->config_set(handle, sreg->id,
+ SCMI_VOLTAGE_ARCH_STATE_OFF);
+}
+
+static int scmi_reg_is_enabled(struct regulator_dev *rdev)
+{
+ int ret;
+ u32 config;
+ struct scmi_regulator *sreg = rdev_get_drvdata(rdev);
+ const struct scmi_handle *handle = sreg->sdev->handle;
+
+ ret = handle->voltage_ops->config_get(handle, sreg->id,
+ &config);
+ if (ret) {
+ dev_err(&sreg->sdev->dev,
+ "Error %d reading regulator %s status.\n",
+ ret, sreg->desc.name);
+ return 0;
+ }
+
+ return config & SCMI_VOLTAGE_ARCH_STATE_ON;
+}
+
+static int scmi_reg_get_voltage_sel(struct regulator_dev *rdev)
+{
+ int ret;
+ s32 volt_uV;
+ struct scmi_regulator *sreg = rdev_get_drvdata(rdev);
+ const struct scmi_handle *handle = sreg->sdev->handle;
+
+ ret = handle->voltage_ops->level_get(handle, sreg->id, &volt_uV);
+ if (ret)
+ return ret;
+
+ return sreg->desc.ops->map_voltage(rdev, volt_uV, volt_uV);
+}
+
+static int scmi_reg_set_voltage_sel(struct regulator_dev *rdev,
+ unsigned int selector)
+{
+ s32 volt_uV;
+ struct scmi_regulator *sreg = rdev_get_drvdata(rdev);
+ const struct scmi_handle *handle = sreg->sdev->handle;
+
+ volt_uV = sreg->desc.ops->list_voltage(rdev, selector);
+ if (volt_uV <= 0)
+ return -EINVAL;
+
+ return handle->voltage_ops->level_set(handle, sreg->id, 0x0, volt_uV);
+}
+
+static const struct regulator_ops scmi_reg_fixed_ops = {
+ .enable = scmi_reg_enable,
+ .disable = scmi_reg_disable,
+ .is_enabled = scmi_reg_is_enabled,
+};
+
+static const struct regulator_ops scmi_reg_linear_ops = {
+ .enable = scmi_reg_enable,
+ .disable = scmi_reg_disable,
+ .is_enabled = scmi_reg_is_enabled,
+ .get_voltage_sel = scmi_reg_get_voltage_sel,
+ .set_voltage_sel = scmi_reg_set_voltage_sel,
+ .list_voltage = regulator_list_voltage_linear,
+ .map_voltage = regulator_map_voltage_linear,
+};
+
+static const struct regulator_ops scmi_reg_discrete_ops = {
+ .enable = scmi_reg_enable,
+ .disable = scmi_reg_disable,
+ .is_enabled = scmi_reg_is_enabled,
+ .get_voltage_sel = scmi_reg_get_voltage_sel,
+ .set_voltage_sel = scmi_reg_set_voltage_sel,
+ .list_voltage = regulator_list_voltage_table,
+ .map_voltage = regulator_map_voltage_iterate,
+};
+
+static int
+scmi_config_linear_regulator_mappings(struct scmi_regulator *sreg,
+ const struct scmi_voltage_info *vinfo)
+{
+ s32 delta_uV;
+
+ /*
+ * Note that SCMI voltage domains describable by linear ranges
+ * (segments) {low, high, step} are guaranteed to come in one single
+ * triplet by the SCMI Voltage Domain protocol support itself.
+ */
+
+ delta_uV = (vinfo->levels_uv[SCMI_VOLTAGE_SEGMENT_HIGH] -
+ vinfo->levels_uv[SCMI_VOLTAGE_SEGMENT_LOW]);
+ /* Rule out buggy negative-intervals answers from fw */
+ if (delta_uV < 0) {
+ dev_err(&sreg->sdev->dev,
+ "Invalid volt-range %d-%duV for domain %d\n",
+ vinfo->levels_uv[SCMI_VOLTAGE_SEGMENT_LOW],
+ vinfo->levels_uv[SCMI_VOLTAGE_SEGMENT_HIGH],
+ sreg->id);
+ return -EINVAL;
+ }
+
+ if (!delta_uV) {
+ /* Just one fixed voltage exposed by SCMI */
+ sreg->desc.fixed_uV =
+ vinfo->levels_uv[SCMI_VOLTAGE_SEGMENT_LOW];
+ sreg->desc.n_voltages = 1;
+ sreg->desc.ops = &scmi_reg_fixed_ops;
+ } else {
+ /* One simple linear mapping. */
+ sreg->desc.min_uV =
+ vinfo->levels_uv[SCMI_VOLTAGE_SEGMENT_LOW];
+ sreg->desc.uV_step =
+ vinfo->levels_uv[SCMI_VOLTAGE_SEGMENT_STEP];
+ sreg->desc.linear_min_sel = 0;
+ sreg->desc.n_voltages = delta_uV / sreg->desc.uV_step;
+ sreg->desc.ops = &scmi_reg_linear_ops;
+ }
+
+ return 0;
+}
+
+static int
+scmi_config_discrete_regulator_mappings(struct scmi_regulator *sreg,
+ const struct scmi_voltage_info *vinfo)
+{
+ /* Discrete non linear levels are mapped to volt_table */
+ sreg->desc.n_voltages = vinfo->num_levels;
+ if (sreg->desc.n_voltages > 1) {
+ sreg->desc.volt_table = (const unsigned int *)vinfo->levels_uv;
+ sreg->desc.ops = &scmi_reg_discrete_ops;
+ } else {
+ sreg->desc.fixed_uV = vinfo->levels_uv[0];
+ sreg->desc.ops = &scmi_reg_fixed_ops;
+ }
+
+ return 0;
+}
+
+static int scmi_regulator_common_init(struct scmi_regulator *sreg)
+{
+ int ret;
+ const struct scmi_handle *handle = sreg->sdev->handle;
+ struct device *dev = &sreg->sdev->dev;
+ const struct scmi_voltage_info *vinfo;
+
+ vinfo = handle->voltage_ops->info_get(handle, sreg->id);
+ if (!vinfo) {
+ dev_warn(dev, "Skipping invalid voltage domain %d\n",
+ sreg->id);
+ return -ENODEV;
+ }
+
+ /*
+ * Regulator framework does not fully support negative voltages
+ * so we discard any voltage domain reported as supporting negative
+ * voltages: as a consequence each levels_uv entry is guaranteed to
+ * be non-negative from here on.
+ */
+ if (vinfo->negative_volts_allowed) {
+ dev_warn(dev, "Negative voltages NOT supported...skip %s\n",
+ sreg->of_node->full_name);
+ return -EOPNOTSUPP;
+ }
+
+ sreg->desc.name = devm_kasprintf(dev, GFP_KERNEL, "%s", vinfo->name);
+ if (!sreg->desc.name)
+ return -ENOMEM;
+
+ sreg->desc.id = sreg->id;
+ sreg->desc.type = REGULATOR_VOLTAGE;
+ sreg->desc.owner = THIS_MODULE;
+ sreg->desc.of_match_full_name = true;
+ sreg->desc.of_match = sreg->of_node->full_name;
+ sreg->desc.regulators_node = "regulators";
+ if (vinfo->segmented)
+ ret = scmi_config_linear_regulator_mappings(sreg, vinfo);
+ else
+ ret = scmi_config_discrete_regulator_mappings(sreg, vinfo);
+ if (ret)
+ return ret;
+
+ /*
+ * Using the scmi device here to have DT searched from Voltage
+ * protocol node down.
+ */
+ sreg->conf.dev = dev;
+ /* Store for later retrieval via rdev_get_drvdata() */
+ sreg->conf.driver_data = sreg;
+
+ return 0;
+}
+
+static int process_scmi_regulator_of_node(struct scmi_device *sdev,
+ struct device_node *np,
+ struct scmi_regulator_info *rinfo)
+{
+ u32 dom, ret;
+
+ ret = of_property_read_u32(np, "reg", &dom);
+ if (ret)
+ return ret;
+
+ if (dom >= rinfo->num_doms)
+ return -ENODEV;
+
+ if (rinfo->sregv[dom]) {
+ dev_err(&sdev->dev,
+ "SCMI Voltage Domain %d already in use. Skipping: %s\n",
+ dom, np->full_name);
+ return -EINVAL;
+ }
+
+ rinfo->sregv[dom] = devm_kzalloc(&sdev->dev,
+ sizeof(struct scmi_regulator),
+ GFP_KERNEL);
+ if (!rinfo->sregv[dom])
+ return -ENOMEM;
+
+ rinfo->sregv[dom]->id = dom;
+ rinfo->sregv[dom]->sdev = sdev;
+ /* get hold of good nodes */
+ of_node_get(np);
+ rinfo->sregv[dom]->of_node = np;
+ dev_dbg(&sdev->dev,
+ "Found SCMI Regulator entry -- OF node [%d] -> %s\n",
+ dom, np->full_name);
+
+ return 0;
+}
+
+static int scmi_regulator_probe(struct scmi_device *sdev)
+{
+ int d, ret, num_doms;
+ struct device_node *np, *child;
+ const struct scmi_handle *handle = sdev->handle;
+ struct scmi_regulator_info *rinfo;
+
+ if (!handle || !handle->voltage_ops)
+ return -ENODEV;
+
+ num_doms = handle->voltage_ops->num_domains_get(handle);
+ if (num_doms <= 0) {
+ if (!num_doms) {
+ dev_err(&sdev->dev,
+ "number of voltage domains invalid\n");
+ num_doms = -EINVAL;
+ } else {
+ dev_err(&sdev->dev,
+ "failed to get voltage domains - err:%d\n",
+ num_doms);
+ }
+
+ return num_doms;
+ }
+
+ rinfo = devm_kzalloc(&sdev->dev, sizeof(*rinfo), GFP_KERNEL);
+ if (!rinfo)
+ return -ENOMEM;
+
+ /* Allocate pointers' array for all possible domains */
+ rinfo->sregv = devm_kcalloc(&sdev->dev, num_doms,
+ sizeof(void *), GFP_KERNEL);
+ if (!rinfo->sregv)
+ return -ENOMEM;
+
+ rinfo->num_doms = num_doms;
+ /*
+ * Start collecting into rinfo->sregv possibly good SCMI Regulators as
+ * described by a well-formed DT entry and associated with an existing
+ * plausible SCMI Voltage Domain number, all belonging to this SCMI
+ * platform instance node (handle->dev->of_node).
+ */
+ np = of_find_node_by_name(handle->dev->of_node, "regulators");
+ for_each_child_of_node(np, child) {
+ ret = process_scmi_regulator_of_node(sdev, child, rinfo);
+ /* abort on any mem issue */
+ if (ret == -ENOMEM)
+ return ret;
+ }
+
+ /*
+ * Register a regulator for each valid regulator-DT-entry that we
+ * can successfully reach via SCMI and has a valid associated voltage
+ * domain.
+ */
+ for (d = 0; d < num_doms; d++) {
+ struct scmi_regulator *sreg = rinfo->sregv[d];
+
+ /* Skip empty slots */
+ if (!sreg)
+ continue;
+ ret = scmi_regulator_common_init(sreg);
+ /* Skip invalid voltage domains */
+ if (ret)
+ continue;
+ sreg->rdev = devm_regulator_register(&sdev->dev, &sreg->desc,
+ &sreg->conf);
+ if (IS_ERR(sreg->rdev)) {
+ sreg->rdev = NULL;
+ continue;
+ }
+
+ dev_info(&sdev->dev,
+ "Regulator %s registered for domain [%d]\n",
+ sreg->desc.name, sreg->id);
+ }
+
+ dev_set_drvdata(&sdev->dev, rinfo);
+
+ return 0;
+}
+
+static void scmi_regulator_remove(struct scmi_device *sdev)
+{
+ int d;
+ struct scmi_regulator_info *rinfo;
+
+ rinfo = dev_get_drvdata(&sdev->dev);
+ if (!rinfo)
+ return;
+
+ for (d = 0; d < rinfo->num_doms; d++) {
+ if (!rinfo->sregv[d])
+ continue;
+ of_node_put(rinfo->sregv[d]->of_node);
+ }
+}
+
+static const struct scmi_device_id scmi_regulator_id_table[] = {
+ { SCMI_PROTOCOL_VOLTAGE, "regulator" },
+ { },
+};
+MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(scmi, scmi_regulator_id_table);
+
+static struct scmi_driver scmi_drv = {
+ .name = "scmi-regulator",
+ .probe = scmi_regulator_probe,
+ .remove = scmi_regulator_remove,
+ .id_table = scmi_regulator_id_table,
+};
+
+module_scmi_driver(scmi_drv);
+
+MODULE_AUTHOR("Cristian Marussi <cristian.marussi@arm.com>");
+MODULE_DESCRIPTION("ARM SCMI regulator driver");
+MODULE_LICENSE("GPL v2");
--
2.17.1
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH v5 4/5] regulator: add SCMI driver
2020-11-17 12:34 ` [PATCH v5 4/5] regulator: add SCMI driver Cristian Marussi
@ 2020-11-19 16:13 ` Sudeep Holla
2020-11-19 16:26 ` Cristian Marussi
2020-11-19 16:39 ` Mark Brown
0 siblings, 2 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: Sudeep Holla @ 2020-11-19 16:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: broonie, Cristian Marussi
Cc: linux-kernel, linux-arm-kernel, devicetree, lukasz.luba,
Jonathan.Cameron, broonie, robh, satyakim, etienne.carriere,
f.fainelli, vincent.guittot, souvik.chakravarty, Sudeep Holla
Hi Mark,
On Tue, Nov 17, 2020 at 12:34:14PM +0000, Cristian Marussi wrote:
> Add a simple regulator based on SCMI Voltage Domain Protocol.
>
I was thinking about how to merge this if and when you have reviewed it
and happy with it. Is it OK to take via ARM SoC with dependent and other
SCMI changes ? Or we can merge the SCMI part next release and the regulator
in the following, up to you.
--
Regards,
Sudeep
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v5 4/5] regulator: add SCMI driver
2020-11-19 16:13 ` Sudeep Holla
@ 2020-11-19 16:26 ` Cristian Marussi
2020-11-19 16:39 ` Mark Brown
1 sibling, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: Cristian Marussi @ 2020-11-19 16:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Sudeep Holla, broonie
Cc: linux-kernel, linux-arm-kernel, devicetree, lukasz.luba,
Jonathan.Cameron, robh, satyakim, etienne.carriere, f.fainelli,
vincent.guittot, souvik.chakravarty
On Thu, Nov 19, 2020 at 04:13:08PM +0000, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> Hi Mark,
>
> On Tue, Nov 17, 2020 at 12:34:14PM +0000, Cristian Marussi wrote:
> > Add a simple regulator based on SCMI Voltage Domain Protocol.
> >
>
> I was thinking about how to merge this if and when you have reviewed it
> and happy with it. Is it OK to take via ARM SoC with dependent and other
> SCMI changes ? Or we can merge the SCMI part next release and the regulator
> in the following, up to you.
>
Mark, please note that since v4, to address some modifications on DT I
added for the core too:
[PATCH v5 3/5] regulator: core: add of_match_full_name boolean flag
Thanks
Cristian
> --
> Regards,
> Sudeep
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v5 4/5] regulator: add SCMI driver
2020-11-19 16:13 ` Sudeep Holla
2020-11-19 16:26 ` Cristian Marussi
@ 2020-11-19 16:39 ` Mark Brown
2020-11-19 17:24 ` Sudeep Holla
1 sibling, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: Mark Brown @ 2020-11-19 16:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Sudeep Holla
Cc: Cristian Marussi, linux-kernel, linux-arm-kernel, devicetree,
lukasz.luba, Jonathan.Cameron, robh, satyakim, etienne.carriere,
f.fainelli, vincent.guittot, souvik.chakravarty
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 416 bytes --]
On Thu, Nov 19, 2020 at 04:13:08PM +0000, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> I was thinking about how to merge this if and when you have reviewed it
> and happy with it. Is it OK to take via ARM SoC with dependent and other
> SCMI changes ? Or we can merge the SCMI part next release and the regulator
> in the following, up to you.
I was expecting you to send me a pull request for the firmware bits once
you've applied them.
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v5 4/5] regulator: add SCMI driver
2020-11-19 16:39 ` Mark Brown
@ 2020-11-19 17:24 ` Sudeep Holla
0 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: Sudeep Holla @ 2020-11-19 17:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Mark Brown
Cc: Cristian Marussi, linux-kernel, linux-arm-kernel, devicetree,
lukasz.luba, Jonathan.Cameron, robh, satyakim, etienne.carriere,
f.fainelli, vincent.guittot, souvik.chakravarty
On Thu, Nov 19, 2020 at 04:39:49PM +0000, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 19, 2020 at 04:13:08PM +0000, Sudeep Holla wrote:
>
> > I was thinking about how to merge this if and when you have reviewed it
> > and happy with it. Is it OK to take via ARM SoC with dependent and other
> > SCMI changes ? Or we can merge the SCMI part next release and the regulator
> > in the following, up to you.
>
> I was expecting you to send me a pull request for the firmware bits once
> you've applied them.
Sure, I can do that.
--
Regards,
Sudeep
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v5 5/5] dt-bindings: arm: add support for SCMI Regulators
2020-11-17 12:34 [PATCH v5 0/5] Add support for SCMIv3.0 Voltage Domain Protocol and SCMI-Regulator Cristian Marussi
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2020-11-17 12:34 ` [PATCH v5 4/5] regulator: add SCMI driver Cristian Marussi
@ 2020-11-17 12:34 ` Cristian Marussi
2020-11-19 15:27 ` Sudeep Holla
4 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: Cristian Marussi @ 2020-11-17 12:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-kernel, linux-arm-kernel, devicetree
Cc: sudeep.holla, lukasz.luba, Jonathan.Cameron, broonie, robh,
satyakim, etienne.carriere, f.fainelli, vincent.guittot,
souvik.chakravarty, cristian.marussi
Add devicetree bindings to support regulators based on SCMI Voltage
Domain Protocol.
Reviewed-by: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Cristian Marussi <cristian.marussi@arm.com>
---
v3 --> v4
- added list of supported Regulator bindings.
v2 --> v3
- avoid awkard examples based on _cpu/_gpu regulators
v1 --> v2
- removed any reference to negative voltages
---
.../devicetree/bindings/arm/arm,scmi.txt | 43 +++++++++++++++++++
1 file changed, 43 insertions(+)
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/arm,scmi.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/arm,scmi.txt
index 55deb68230eb..6e011ca97079 100644
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/arm,scmi.txt
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/arm,scmi.txt
@@ -62,6 +62,29 @@ Required properties:
- #power-domain-cells : Should be 1. Contains the device or the power
domain ID value used by SCMI commands.
+Regulator bindings for the SCMI Regulator based on SCMI Message Protocol
+------------------------------------------------------------
+An SCMI Regulator is permanently bound to a well defined SCMI Voltage Domain,
+and should be always positioned as a root regulator.
+It does not support any current operation.
+
+SCMI Regulators are grouped under a 'regulators' node which in turn is a child
+of the SCMI Voltage protocol node inside the desired SCMI instance node.
+
+This binding uses the common regulator binding[6] but, due to SCMI abstractions,
+supports only a subset of its properties as specified below amongst Optional
+properties.
+
+Required properties:
+ - reg : shall identify an existent SCMI Voltage Domain.
+
+Optional properties:
+ - regulator-name
+ - regulator-min-microvolt / regulator-max-microvolt
+ - regulator-always-on / regulator-boot-on
+ - regulator-max-step-microvolt
+ - regulator-coupled-with / regulator-coupled-max-spread
+
Sensor bindings for the sensors based on SCMI Message Protocol
--------------------------------------------------------------
SCMI provides an API to access the various sensors on the SoC.
@@ -105,6 +128,7 @@ Required sub-node properties:
[3] Documentation/devicetree/bindings/thermal/thermal*.yaml
[4] Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sram/sram.yaml
[5] Documentation/devicetree/bindings/reset/reset.txt
+[6] Documentation/devicetree/bindings/regulator/regulator.yaml
Example:
@@ -169,6 +193,25 @@ firmware {
reg = <0x16>;
#reset-cells = <1>;
};
+
+ scmi_voltage: protocol@17 {
+ reg = <0x17>;
+
+ regulators {
+ regulator_devX: regulator@0 {
+ reg = <0x0>;
+ regulator-max-microvolt = <3300000>;
+ };
+
+ regulator_devY: regulator@9 {
+ reg = <0x9>;
+ regulator-min-microvolt = <500000>;
+ regulator-max-microvolt = <4200000>;
+ };
+
+ ...
+ };
+ };
};
};
--
2.17.1
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH v5 5/5] dt-bindings: arm: add support for SCMI Regulators
2020-11-17 12:34 ` [PATCH v5 5/5] dt-bindings: arm: add support for SCMI Regulators Cristian Marussi
@ 2020-11-19 15:27 ` Sudeep Holla
2020-11-19 19:09 ` Cristian Marussi
0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: Sudeep Holla @ 2020-11-19 15:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Cristian Marussi
Cc: linux-kernel, linux-arm-kernel, devicetree, lukasz.luba,
Jonathan.Cameron, broonie, robh, satyakim, etienne.carriere,
f.fainelli, vincent.guittot, souvik.chakravarty, Sudeep Holla
On Tue, Nov 17, 2020 at 12:34:15PM +0000, Cristian Marussi wrote:
> Add devicetree bindings to support regulators based on SCMI Voltage
> Domain Protocol.
>
Ideally, the DT binding should be first one, rather before the binding
is used in the code. I can move the order while applying.
--
Regards,
Sudeep
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v5 5/5] dt-bindings: arm: add support for SCMI Regulators
2020-11-19 15:27 ` Sudeep Holla
@ 2020-11-19 19:09 ` Cristian Marussi
0 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: Cristian Marussi @ 2020-11-19 19:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Sudeep Holla
Cc: linux-kernel, linux-arm-kernel, devicetree, lukasz.luba,
Jonathan.Cameron, broonie, robh, satyakim, etienne.carriere,
f.fainelli, vincent.guittot, souvik.chakravarty
On Thu, Nov 19, 2020 at 03:27:19PM +0000, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 17, 2020 at 12:34:15PM +0000, Cristian Marussi wrote:
> > Add devicetree bindings to support regulators based on SCMI Voltage
> > Domain Protocol.
> >
>
> Ideally, the DT binding should be first one, rather before the binding
> is used in the code. I can move the order while applying.
>
I'll do in v6
Cristian
> --
> Regards,
> Sudeep
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread