From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <email@example.com> To: Sebastian Krzyszkowiak <firstname.lastname@example.org>, Sebastian Reichel <email@example.com>, firstname.lastname@example.org Cc: email@example.com, Anton Vorontsov <firstname.lastname@example.org>, Ramakrishna Pallala <email@example.com>, Dirk Brandewie <firstname.lastname@example.org>, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] power: supply: max17042_battery: Clear status bits in interrupt handler Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2021 09:21:15 +0200 [thread overview] Message-ID: <email@example.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <5702731.UytLkSCjyO@pliszka> On 13/09/2021 20:32, Sebastian Krzyszkowiak wrote: > On poniedziałek, 13 września 2021 15:02:34 CEST Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >> On 12/09/2021 22:54, Sebastian Krzyszkowiak wrote: >>> The gauge requires us to clear the status bits manually for some alerts >>> to be properly dismissed. Previously the IRQ was configured to react only >>> on falling edge, which wasn't technically correct (the ALRT line is active >>> low), but it had a happy side-effect of preventing interrupt storms >>> on uncleared alerts from happening. >>> >>> Fixes: 7fbf6b731bca ("power: supply: max17042: Do not enforce (incorrect) >>> interrupt trigger type") Cc: <firstname.lastname@example.org> >>> Signed-off-by: Sebastian Krzyszkowiak <email@example.com> >>> --- >>> >>> drivers/power/supply/max17042_battery.c | 3 +++ >>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) >>> >>> diff --git a/drivers/power/supply/max17042_battery.c >>> b/drivers/power/supply/max17042_battery.c index >>> 8dffae76b6a3..c53980c8432a 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/power/supply/max17042_battery.c >>> +++ b/drivers/power/supply/max17042_battery.c >>> @@ -876,6 +876,9 @@ static irqreturn_t max17042_thread_handler(int id, >>> void *dev)> >>> max17042_set_soc_threshold(chip, 1); >>> >>> } >>> >>> + regmap_clear_bits(chip->regmap, MAX17042_STATUS, >>> + 0xFFFF & ~(STATUS_POR_BIT | > STATUS_BST_BIT)); >>> + >> >> Are you sure that this was the reason of interrupt storm? Not incorrect >> SoC value (read from register for ModelGauge m3 while not configuring >> fuel gauge model). > > Yes, I am sure. I have observed this on a fully configured max17055 with > ModelGauge m5. It also makes sense to me based on what I read in the code and > datasheets. > > There were two kinds of storms - the short ones happening on each SOC change > caused by SOC threshold alerts set by max17042_set_soc_threshold which > eventually got cleared by reconfiguring the thresholds; and a huge one > happening when SOC got down to 0% that did not get away until the battery got > charged to at least 1% at which point the thresholds got reconfigured again > (which is how I noticed the underflow fixed by the second patch). OK, undestood. > > Besides, I also have patches for configuring m5 gauge via DT that I'll send > once I clean them up. That's cool! Happy to see such work. > >> You should only clear bits which you are awaken for... Have in mind that >> in DT-configuration the fuel gauge is most likely broken by missing >> configuration. With alert enabled, several other config fields should be >> cleared. > > I have checked all the bits in the Status register and aside of Bst, POR and > bunch of "don't-care" bits they're all alert indicators that we either handle > explicitly in the interrupt handler (Smn/Smx) or implicitly via > power_supply_changed (Imn/Imx, Vmn/Vmx, Tmn/Tmx, dSOCi, Bi/Br). The driver > unconditionally enables alerts for SOC thresholds and all the rest stays > effectively disabled at POR; however, a bootloader or firmware may configure it > differently, which may be wanted for things like resuming from suspend when a > bad condition happens. Therefore we need to clear all the bits anyway and I'm > not sure whether iterating through them in a "if set then clear" loop gains us > anything aside of additional lines of code. Seems reasonable, you're right. Could you mention this expolanation in commit msg or comment in the code? Best regards, Krzysztof
prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-09-14 7:21 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2021-09-12 20:54 Sebastian Krzyszkowiak 2021-09-12 20:54 ` [PATCH 2/2] power: supply: max17042_battery: Prevent int underflow in set_soc_threshold Sebastian Krzyszkowiak 2021-09-13 5:43 ` Greg KH 2021-09-13 13:05 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski 2021-09-13 13:02 ` [PATCH 1/2] power: supply: max17042_battery: Clear status bits in interrupt handler Krzysztof Kozlowski 2021-09-13 18:32 ` Sebastian Krzyszkowiak 2021-09-14 7:21 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski [this message]
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 \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --email@example.com \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --email@example.com \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --email@example.com \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --email@example.com \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --email@example.com \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --subject='Re: [PATCH 1/2] power: supply: max17042_battery: Clear status bits in interrupt handler' \ /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
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).