lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Nov]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH 2/3] power: supply: cros-ec-usbpd-charger: Fix host events
Hi Jon,

Some comments below.

Missatge de Jon Flatley <jflat@chromium.org> del dia dc., 13 de nov.
2019 a les 4:19:
>
> There's a bug on ACPI platforms where host events from the ECPD ACPI
> device never make their way to the cros-ec-usbpd-charger driver. This
> makes it so the only time the charger driver updates its state is when
> user space accesses its sysfs attributes.
>
> Now that these events have been unified into a single notifier chain on
> both ACPI and non-ACPI platforms the charger driver can just be updated
> to use this new notifer.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jon Flatley <jflat@chromium.org>
> ---
> drivers/power/supply/Kconfig | 2 +-
> drivers/power/supply/cros_usbpd-charger.c | 45 ++++++++---------------
> 2 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 30 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/power/supply/Kconfig b/drivers/power/supply/Kconfig
> index c84a7b1caeb6..7664849d7680 100644
> --- a/drivers/power/supply/Kconfig
> +++ b/drivers/power/supply/Kconfig
> @@ -659,7 +659,7 @@ config CHARGER_RT9455
>
> config CHARGER_CROS_USBPD
> tristate "ChromeOS EC based USBPD charger"
> - depends on CROS_EC
> + depends on CROS_EC_USBPD_NOTIFY
> default n
> help
> Say Y here to enable ChromeOS EC based USBPD charger
> diff --git a/drivers/power/supply/cros_usbpd-charger.c b/drivers/power/supply/cros_usbpd-charger.c
> index 6cc7c3910e09..58cf51b51179 100644
> --- a/drivers/power/supply/cros_usbpd-charger.c
> +++ b/drivers/power/supply/cros_usbpd-charger.c
> @@ -8,6 +8,7 @@
> #include <linux/mfd/cros_ec.h>
> #include <linux/module.h>
> #include <linux/platform_data/cros_ec_commands.h>
> +#include <linux/platform_data/cros_ec_usbpd_notify.h>
> #include <linux/platform_data/cros_ec_proto.h>
> #include <linux/platform_device.h>
> #include <linux/power_supply.h>
> @@ -524,32 +525,22 @@ static int cros_usbpd_charger_property_is_writeable(struct power_supply *psy,
> }
>
> static int cros_usbpd_charger_ec_event(struct notifier_block *nb,
> - unsigned long queued_during_suspend,
> + unsigned long host_event,
> void *_notify)
> {
> - struct cros_ec_device *ec_device;
> struct charger_data *charger;
> - u32 host_event;
>
> charger = container_of(nb, struct charger_data, notifier);
> - ec_device = charger->ec_device;
>
> - host_event = cros_ec_get_host_event(ec_device);
> - if (host_event & EC_HOST_EVENT_MASK(EC_HOST_EVENT_PD_MCU)) {
> - cros_usbpd_charger_power_changed(charger->ports[0]->psy);
> - return NOTIFY_OK;
> - } else {
> - return NOTIFY_DONE;
> - }
> + cros_usbpd_charger_power_changed(charger->ports[0]->psy);
> + return NOTIFY_OK;
> }
>
> static void cros_usbpd_charger_unregister_notifier(void *data)
> {
> struct charger_data *charger = data;
> - struct cros_ec_device *ec_device = charger->ec_device;
>
> - blocking_notifier_chain_unregister(&ec_device->event_notifier,
> - &charger->notifier);
> + cros_ec_usbpd_unregister_notify(&charger->notifier);
> }
>

Can we get rid of this function and call directly
cros_ec_usbpd_unregister_notify where the function is used?

> static int cros_usbpd_charger_probe(struct platform_device *pd)
> @@ -683,21 +674,17 @@ static int cros_usbpd_charger_probe(struct platform_device *pd)
> goto fail;
> }
>
> - if (ec_device->mkbp_event_supported) {
> - /* Get PD events from the EC */
> - charger->notifier.notifier_call = cros_usbpd_charger_ec_event;
> - ret = blocking_notifier_chain_register(
> - &ec_device->event_notifier,
> - &charger->notifier);
> - if (ret < 0) {
> - dev_warn(dev, "failed to register notifier\n");
> - } else {
> - ret = devm_add_action_or_reset(dev,
> - cros_usbpd_charger_unregister_notifier,
> - charger);
> - if (ret < 0)
> - goto fail;
> - }
> + /* Get PD events from the EC */
> + charger->notifier.notifier_call = cros_usbpd_charger_ec_event;
> + ret = cros_ec_usbpd_register_notify(&charger->notifier);
> + if (ret < 0) {
> + dev_warn(dev, "failed to register notifier\n");

Hmm, now I am wondering if should we only warn and continue or fail.
Makes sense have this without the notifier?

> + } else {
> + ret = devm_add_action_or_reset(dev,
> + cros_usbpd_charger_unregister_notifier,
> + charger);
> + if (ret < 0)
> + goto fail;
> }
>
> return 0;
> --
> 2.24.0.432.g9d3f5f5b63-goog
>

Thanks,
Enric

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-11-14 22:55    [W:0.158 / U:12.212 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site