From: Jon Hunter <jon-hunter@ti.com> To: Kevin Hilman <khilman@linaro.org> Cc: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>, Grant Likely <grant.likely@secretlab.ca>, Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@ti.com>, Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com>, linux-omap <linux-omap@vger.kernel.org>, linux-arm <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH] gpio/omap: ensure gpio context is initialised Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2013 19:49:29 -0500 [thread overview] Message-ID: <51709499.8030208@ti.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <5170911C.6010507@ti.com> On 04/18/2013 07:34 PM, Jon Hunter wrote: > > On 04/18/2013 06:10 PM, Jon Hunter wrote: >> On 04/18/2013 04:34 PM, Kevin Hilman wrote: > > ... > >>> Why not just init context right here if bank->loses_context && >>> !bank->context_valid? > > I really like this idea a lot. It can really clean-up the code > and really make it much more readable. Before we were playing > some tricks with when we init'ed the get_context_loss_count() > function pointer. How about the below? > > Tony, care to re-test? > > Cheers > Jon > > From d7a940531d354e6be5e16ee50fa8344041df963a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > From: Jon Hunter <jon-hunter@ti.com> > Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2013 13:06:54 -0500 > Subject: [PATCH] gpio/omap: ensure gpio context is initialised > > Commit a2797be (gpio/omap: force restore if context loss is not > detectable) broke gpio support for OMAP when booting with device-tree > because a restore of the gpio context being performed without ever > initialising the gpio context. In other words, the context restored was > bad. > > This problem could also occur in the non device-tree case, however, it > is much less likely because when booting without device-tree we can > detect context loss via a platform specific API and so context restore > is performed less often. > > Nevertheless we should ensure that the gpio context is initialised > on the first pm-runtime resume for gpio banks that could lose their > state regardless of whether we are booting with device-tree or not. > > The context loss count was being initialised on the first pm-runtime > suspend following a resume, by populating the get_count_loss_count() > function pointer after the first pm-runtime resume. To make the code > more readable and logical, initialise the context loss count on the > first pm-runtime resume if the context is not yet valid. > > Reported-by: Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com> > Signed-off-by: Jon Hunter <jon-hunter@ti.com> > --- > drivers/gpio/gpio-omap.c | 45 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--- > 1 file changed, 42 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpio-omap.c b/drivers/gpio/gpio-omap.c > index 0557529..db3c732 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpio/gpio-omap.c > +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpio-omap.c > @@ -70,6 +70,7 @@ struct gpio_bank { > bool is_mpuio; > bool dbck_flag; > bool loses_context; > + bool context_valid; > int stride; > u32 width; > int context_loss_count; > @@ -1129,6 +1130,7 @@ static int omap_gpio_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > bank->loses_context = true; > } else { > bank->loses_context = pdata->loses_context; > + bank->get_context_loss_count = pdata->get_context_loss_count; Still need to check loses_context for populating get_context_loss_count here. Updated patch below. Jon >From d02ef7b7dfcf8e13bf019aedfdecb38ca3c6749f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Jon Hunter <jon-hunter@ti.com> Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2013 13:06:54 -0500 Subject: [PATCH] gpio/omap: ensure gpio context is initialised Commit a2797be (gpio/omap: force restore if context loss is not detectable) broke gpio support for OMAP when booting with device-tree because a restore of the gpio context being performed without ever initialising the gpio context. In other words, the context restored was bad. This problem could also occur in the non device-tree case, however, it is much less likely because when booting without device-tree we can detect context loss via a platform specific API and so context restore is performed less often. Nevertheless we should ensure that the gpio context is initialised on the first pm-runtime resume for gpio banks that could lose their state regardless of whether we are booting with device-tree or not. The context loss count was being initialised on the first pm-runtime suspend following a resume, by populating the get_count_loss_count() function pointer after the first pm-runtime resume. To make the code more readable and logical, initialise the context loss count on the first pm-runtime resume if the context is not yet valid. Reported-by: Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com> Signed-off-by: Jon Hunter <jon-hunter@ti.com> --- drivers/gpio/gpio-omap.c | 48 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--- 1 file changed, 45 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpio-omap.c b/drivers/gpio/gpio-omap.c index 0557529..c3c3ffe 100644 --- a/drivers/gpio/gpio-omap.c +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpio-omap.c @@ -70,6 +70,7 @@ struct gpio_bank { bool is_mpuio; bool dbck_flag; bool loses_context; + bool context_valid; int stride; u32 width; int context_loss_count; @@ -1129,6 +1130,10 @@ static int omap_gpio_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) bank->loses_context = true; } else { bank->loses_context = pdata->loses_context; + + if (bank->loses_context) + bank->get_context_loss_count = + pdata->get_context_loss_count; } @@ -1179,9 +1184,6 @@ static int omap_gpio_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) omap_gpio_chip_init(bank); omap_gpio_show_rev(bank); - if (bank->loses_context) - bank->get_context_loss_count = pdata->get_context_loss_count; - pm_runtime_put(bank->dev); list_add_tail(&bank->node, &omap_gpio_list); @@ -1260,6 +1262,8 @@ update_gpio_context_count: return 0; } +static void omap_gpio_init_context(struct gpio_bank *p); + static int omap_gpio_runtime_resume(struct device *dev) { struct platform_device *pdev = to_platform_device(dev); @@ -1269,6 +1273,20 @@ static int omap_gpio_runtime_resume(struct device *dev) int c; spin_lock_irqsave(&bank->lock, flags); + + /* + * On the first resume during the probe, the context has not + * been initialised and so initialise it now. Also initialise + * the context loss count. + */ + if (bank->loses_context && !bank->context_valid) { + omap_gpio_init_context(bank); + + if (bank->get_context_loss_count) + bank->context_loss_count = + bank->get_context_loss_count(bank->dev); + } + _gpio_dbck_enable(bank); /* @@ -1385,6 +1403,29 @@ void omap2_gpio_resume_after_idle(void) } #if defined(CONFIG_PM_RUNTIME) +static void omap_gpio_init_context(struct gpio_bank *p) +{ + struct omap_gpio_reg_offs *regs = p->regs; + void __iomem *base = p->base; + + p->context.ctrl = __raw_readl(base + regs->ctrl); + p->context.oe = __raw_readl(base + regs->direction); + p->context.wake_en = __raw_readl(base + regs->wkup_en); + p->context.leveldetect0 = __raw_readl(base + regs->leveldetect0); + p->context.leveldetect1 = __raw_readl(base + regs->leveldetect1); + p->context.risingdetect = __raw_readl(base + regs->risingdetect); + p->context.fallingdetect = __raw_readl(base + regs->fallingdetect); + p->context.irqenable1 = __raw_readl(base + regs->irqenable); + p->context.irqenable2 = __raw_readl(base + regs->irqenable2); + + if (regs->set_dataout && p->regs->clr_dataout) + p->context.dataout = __raw_readl(base + regs->set_dataout); + else + p->context.dataout = __raw_readl(base + regs->dataout); + + p->context_valid = true; +} + static void omap_gpio_restore_context(struct gpio_bank *bank) { __raw_writel(bank->context.wake_en, @@ -1422,6 +1463,7 @@ static void omap_gpio_restore_context(struct gpio_bank *bank) #else #define omap_gpio_runtime_suspend NULL #define omap_gpio_runtime_resume NULL +static void omap_gpio_init_context(struct gpio_bank *p) {} #endif static const struct dev_pm_ops gpio_pm_ops = { -- 1.7.10.4
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: jon-hunter@ti.com (Jon Hunter) To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Subject: [PATCH] gpio/omap: ensure gpio context is initialised Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2013 19:49:29 -0500 [thread overview] Message-ID: <51709499.8030208@ti.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <5170911C.6010507@ti.com> On 04/18/2013 07:34 PM, Jon Hunter wrote: > > On 04/18/2013 06:10 PM, Jon Hunter wrote: >> On 04/18/2013 04:34 PM, Kevin Hilman wrote: > > ... > >>> Why not just init context right here if bank->loses_context && >>> !bank->context_valid? > > I really like this idea a lot. It can really clean-up the code > and really make it much more readable. Before we were playing > some tricks with when we init'ed the get_context_loss_count() > function pointer. How about the below? > > Tony, care to re-test? > > Cheers > Jon > > From d7a940531d354e6be5e16ee50fa8344041df963a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > From: Jon Hunter <jon-hunter@ti.com> > Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2013 13:06:54 -0500 > Subject: [PATCH] gpio/omap: ensure gpio context is initialised > > Commit a2797be (gpio/omap: force restore if context loss is not > detectable) broke gpio support for OMAP when booting with device-tree > because a restore of the gpio context being performed without ever > initialising the gpio context. In other words, the context restored was > bad. > > This problem could also occur in the non device-tree case, however, it > is much less likely because when booting without device-tree we can > detect context loss via a platform specific API and so context restore > is performed less often. > > Nevertheless we should ensure that the gpio context is initialised > on the first pm-runtime resume for gpio banks that could lose their > state regardless of whether we are booting with device-tree or not. > > The context loss count was being initialised on the first pm-runtime > suspend following a resume, by populating the get_count_loss_count() > function pointer after the first pm-runtime resume. To make the code > more readable and logical, initialise the context loss count on the > first pm-runtime resume if the context is not yet valid. > > Reported-by: Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com> > Signed-off-by: Jon Hunter <jon-hunter@ti.com> > --- > drivers/gpio/gpio-omap.c | 45 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--- > 1 file changed, 42 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpio-omap.c b/drivers/gpio/gpio-omap.c > index 0557529..db3c732 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpio/gpio-omap.c > +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpio-omap.c > @@ -70,6 +70,7 @@ struct gpio_bank { > bool is_mpuio; > bool dbck_flag; > bool loses_context; > + bool context_valid; > int stride; > u32 width; > int context_loss_count; > @@ -1129,6 +1130,7 @@ static int omap_gpio_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > bank->loses_context = true; > } else { > bank->loses_context = pdata->loses_context; > + bank->get_context_loss_count = pdata->get_context_loss_count; Still need to check loses_context for populating get_context_loss_count here. Updated patch below. Jon >From d02ef7b7dfcf8e13bf019aedfdecb38ca3c6749f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Jon Hunter <jon-hunter@ti.com> Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2013 13:06:54 -0500 Subject: [PATCH] gpio/omap: ensure gpio context is initialised Commit a2797be (gpio/omap: force restore if context loss is not detectable) broke gpio support for OMAP when booting with device-tree because a restore of the gpio context being performed without ever initialising the gpio context. In other words, the context restored was bad. This problem could also occur in the non device-tree case, however, it is much less likely because when booting without device-tree we can detect context loss via a platform specific API and so context restore is performed less often. Nevertheless we should ensure that the gpio context is initialised on the first pm-runtime resume for gpio banks that could lose their state regardless of whether we are booting with device-tree or not. The context loss count was being initialised on the first pm-runtime suspend following a resume, by populating the get_count_loss_count() function pointer after the first pm-runtime resume. To make the code more readable and logical, initialise the context loss count on the first pm-runtime resume if the context is not yet valid. Reported-by: Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com> Signed-off-by: Jon Hunter <jon-hunter@ti.com> --- drivers/gpio/gpio-omap.c | 48 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--- 1 file changed, 45 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpio-omap.c b/drivers/gpio/gpio-omap.c index 0557529..c3c3ffe 100644 --- a/drivers/gpio/gpio-omap.c +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpio-omap.c @@ -70,6 +70,7 @@ struct gpio_bank { bool is_mpuio; bool dbck_flag; bool loses_context; + bool context_valid; int stride; u32 width; int context_loss_count; @@ -1129,6 +1130,10 @@ static int omap_gpio_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) bank->loses_context = true; } else { bank->loses_context = pdata->loses_context; + + if (bank->loses_context) + bank->get_context_loss_count = + pdata->get_context_loss_count; } @@ -1179,9 +1184,6 @@ static int omap_gpio_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) omap_gpio_chip_init(bank); omap_gpio_show_rev(bank); - if (bank->loses_context) - bank->get_context_loss_count = pdata->get_context_loss_count; - pm_runtime_put(bank->dev); list_add_tail(&bank->node, &omap_gpio_list); @@ -1260,6 +1262,8 @@ update_gpio_context_count: return 0; } +static void omap_gpio_init_context(struct gpio_bank *p); + static int omap_gpio_runtime_resume(struct device *dev) { struct platform_device *pdev = to_platform_device(dev); @@ -1269,6 +1273,20 @@ static int omap_gpio_runtime_resume(struct device *dev) int c; spin_lock_irqsave(&bank->lock, flags); + + /* + * On the first resume during the probe, the context has not + * been initialised and so initialise it now. Also initialise + * the context loss count. + */ + if (bank->loses_context && !bank->context_valid) { + omap_gpio_init_context(bank); + + if (bank->get_context_loss_count) + bank->context_loss_count = + bank->get_context_loss_count(bank->dev); + } + _gpio_dbck_enable(bank); /* @@ -1385,6 +1403,29 @@ void omap2_gpio_resume_after_idle(void) } #if defined(CONFIG_PM_RUNTIME) +static void omap_gpio_init_context(struct gpio_bank *p) +{ + struct omap_gpio_reg_offs *regs = p->regs; + void __iomem *base = p->base; + + p->context.ctrl = __raw_readl(base + regs->ctrl); + p->context.oe = __raw_readl(base + regs->direction); + p->context.wake_en = __raw_readl(base + regs->wkup_en); + p->context.leveldetect0 = __raw_readl(base + regs->leveldetect0); + p->context.leveldetect1 = __raw_readl(base + regs->leveldetect1); + p->context.risingdetect = __raw_readl(base + regs->risingdetect); + p->context.fallingdetect = __raw_readl(base + regs->fallingdetect); + p->context.irqenable1 = __raw_readl(base + regs->irqenable); + p->context.irqenable2 = __raw_readl(base + regs->irqenable2); + + if (regs->set_dataout && p->regs->clr_dataout) + p->context.dataout = __raw_readl(base + regs->set_dataout); + else + p->context.dataout = __raw_readl(base + regs->dataout); + + p->context_valid = true; +} + static void omap_gpio_restore_context(struct gpio_bank *bank) { __raw_writel(bank->context.wake_en, @@ -1422,6 +1463,7 @@ static void omap_gpio_restore_context(struct gpio_bank *bank) #else #define omap_gpio_runtime_suspend NULL #define omap_gpio_runtime_resume NULL +static void omap_gpio_init_context(struct gpio_bank *p) {} #endif static const struct dev_pm_ops gpio_pm_ops = { -- 1.7.10.4
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-04-19 0:49 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2013-04-17 20:31 [PATCH] gpio/omap: ensure gpio context is initialised Jon Hunter 2013-04-17 20:31 ` Jon Hunter 2013-04-18 8:22 ` Santosh Shilimkar 2013-04-18 8:22 ` Santosh Shilimkar 2013-04-18 16:46 ` Jon Hunter 2013-04-18 16:46 ` Jon Hunter 2013-04-18 21:34 ` Kevin Hilman 2013-04-18 21:34 ` Kevin Hilman 2013-04-18 23:10 ` Jon Hunter 2013-04-18 23:10 ` Jon Hunter 2013-04-19 0:34 ` Jon Hunter 2013-04-19 0:34 ` Jon Hunter 2013-04-19 0:49 ` Jon Hunter [this message] 2013-04-19 0:49 ` Jon Hunter 2013-04-19 6:32 ` Santosh Shilimkar 2013-04-19 6:32 ` Santosh Shilimkar 2013-04-19 14:05 ` Kevin Hilman 2013-04-19 14:05 ` Kevin Hilman 2013-04-19 14:40 ` Santosh Shilimkar 2013-04-19 14:40 ` Santosh Shilimkar 2013-04-19 15:36 ` Tony Lindgren 2013-04-19 15:36 ` Tony Lindgren 2013-04-26 7:54 ` Linus Walleij 2013-04-26 7:54 ` Linus Walleij
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=51709499.8030208@ti.com \ --to=jon-hunter@ti.com \ --cc=grant.likely@secretlab.ca \ --cc=khilman@linaro.org \ --cc=linus.walleij@linaro.org \ --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \ --cc=linux-omap@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=santosh.shilimkar@ti.com \ --cc=tony@atomide.com \ /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: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.