From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-15.7 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER,INCLUDES_PATCH, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C36EC4338F for ; Tue, 27 Jul 2021 12:21:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B8B961A65 for ; Tue, 27 Jul 2021 12:21:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S236539AbhG0MU7 (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Jul 2021 08:20:59 -0400 Received: from m43-7.mailgun.net ([69.72.43.7]:63008 "EHLO m43-7.mailgun.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S231956AbhG0MU6 (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Jul 2021 08:20:58 -0400 DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha256; v=1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mg.codeaurora.org; q=dns/txt; s=smtp; t=1627388458; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-Type: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: Date: Message-ID: From: References: Cc: To: Subject: Sender; bh=k497hUNnWYgJi8CkGD/uCFog89DShQgUcSehYrCMmnY=; b=LIWXzlRuQZR0WmJ7NC3VF+SSqBpbMjLD9qDFtcOEieYYEE4jAiIBCdU098VKr2dVaeDD3JyL fYtAI9jH5ZUZT8ttsQh30oKP2cwZNz0p6P9ye80q9TvaB2mPVCfkMUC8mb9jUfq9J2qIvXYY efiREixG9WDjP/tjGvZGnldKnUs= X-Mailgun-Sending-Ip: 69.72.43.7 X-Mailgun-Sid: WyI0MWYwYSIsICJsaW51eC1rZXJuZWxAdmdlci5rZXJuZWwub3JnIiwgImJlOWU0YSJd Received: from smtp.codeaurora.org (ec2-35-166-182-171.us-west-2.compute.amazonaws.com [35.166.182.171]) by smtp-out-n03.prod.us-east-1.postgun.com with SMTP id 60fffa0d1dd16c878889fb59 (version=TLS1.2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256); Tue, 27 Jul 2021 12:20:29 GMT Sender: rnayak=codeaurora.org@mg.codeaurora.org Received: by smtp.codeaurora.org (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 3DBA7C43217; Tue, 27 Jul 2021 12:20:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [10.50.41.208] (blr-bdr-fw-01_GlobalNAT_AllZones-Outside.qualcomm.com [103.229.18.19]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: rnayak) by smtp.codeaurora.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C59E9C433F1; Tue, 27 Jul 2021 12:20:24 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 smtp.codeaurora.org C59E9C433F1 Authentication-Results: aws-us-west-2-caf-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=codeaurora.org Authentication-Results: aws-us-west-2-caf-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org; spf=fail smtp.mailfrom=rnayak@codeaurora.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] nvmem: qfprom: sc7280: Handle the additional power-domains vote To: Doug Anderson Cc: Andy Gross , Bjorn Andersson , Srinivas Kandagatla , Rob Herring , linux-arm-msm , "open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS" , LKML , "Ravi Kumar Bokka (Temp)" References: <1626931716-10591-1-git-send-email-rnayak@codeaurora.org> <1626931716-10591-3-git-send-email-rnayak@codeaurora.org> From: Rajendra Nayak Message-ID: <8a50aa2c-4468-078c-36f5-74dde6dda16e@codeaurora.org> Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2021 17:50:22 +0530 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.11.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 7/23/2021 10:13 PM, Doug Anderson wrote: > Hi, > > On Wed, Jul 21, 2021 at 10:29 PM Rajendra Nayak wrote: >> >> On sc7280, to reliably blow fuses, we need an additional vote >> on max performance state of 'MX' power-domain. >> Add support for power-domain performance state voting in the >> driver. >> >> Signed-off-by: Rajendra Nayak >> --- >> drivers/nvmem/qfprom.c | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++++ >> 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/nvmem/qfprom.c b/drivers/nvmem/qfprom.c >> index 81fbad5..4d0a576 100644 >> --- a/drivers/nvmem/qfprom.c >> +++ b/drivers/nvmem/qfprom.c >> @@ -12,6 +12,8 @@ >> #include >> #include >> #include >> +#include >> +#include >> #include >> #include >> >> @@ -149,6 +151,11 @@ static void qfprom_disable_fuse_blowing(const struct qfprom_priv *priv, >> if (ret) >> dev_warn(priv->dev, "Failed to set 0 voltage (ignoring)\n"); >> >> + if (priv->dev->pm_domain) { >> + dev_pm_genpd_set_performance_state(priv->dev, 0); >> + pm_runtime_put(priv->dev); >> + } >> + >> ret = regulator_disable(priv->vcc); >> if (ret) >> dev_warn(priv->dev, "Failed to disable regulator (ignoring)\n"); >> @@ -212,6 +219,16 @@ static int qfprom_enable_fuse_blowing(const struct qfprom_priv *priv, >> goto err_clk_rate_set; >> } >> >> + if (priv->dev->pm_domain) { >> + ret = pm_runtime_get_sync(priv->dev); >> + if (ret < 0) { >> + pm_runtime_put_noidle(priv->dev); >> + dev_err(priv->dev, "Failed to enable power-domain\n"); >> + goto err_reg_enable; >> + } >> + dev_pm_genpd_set_performance_state(priv->dev, INT_MAX); >> + } >> + >> old->timer_val = readl(priv->qfpconf + QFPROM_BLOW_TIMER_OFFSET); >> old->accel_val = readl(priv->qfpconf + QFPROM_ACCEL_OFFSET); >> writel(priv->soc_data->qfprom_blow_timer_value, >> @@ -221,6 +238,8 @@ static int qfprom_enable_fuse_blowing(const struct qfprom_priv *priv, >> >> return 0; >> >> +err_reg_enable: >> + regulator_disable(priv->vcc); >> err_clk_rate_set: >> clk_set_rate(priv->secclk, old->clk_rate); >> err_clk_prepared: >> @@ -420,6 +439,9 @@ static int qfprom_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) >> econfig.reg_write = qfprom_reg_write; >> } >> >> + if (dev->pm_domain) >> + pm_runtime_enable(dev); >> + > > Where is the matching pm_runtime_disable()? Should be one in > .remove(), or use devm_add_action_or_reset() to wrap a call to it. Ah, right, i need to handle that. > > Also: do you really need to test for dev->pm_domain in your patch? > Seems like it should always be fine to call pm_runtime_enable() and > then always fine to call the get/put. ...and presumably always fine to > even set the performance state? Sure, i'll give it a try and see if that works or ends up throwing me any warns, i'll repost with that or update if that does not work for some reason. thanks for the review. -- QUALCOMM INDIA, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation