lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [Oct]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2 06/12] soc: mediatek: pm-domains: Add SMI block as bus protection block
From
Date


On 05/10/2020 03:48, Nicolas Boichat wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 2, 2020 at 4:56 PM Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On 01/10/2020 18:01, Enric Balletbo i Serra wrote:
>>> From: Matthias Brugger <mbrugger@suse.com>
>>>
>>> Apart from the infracfg block, the SMI block is used to enable the bus
>>> protection for some power domains. Add support for this block.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Matthias Brugger <mbrugger@suse.com>
>>> Signed-off-by: Enric Balletbo i Serra <enric.balletbo@collabora.com>
>>> ---
>>>
>>> Changes in v2: None
>>>
>>> drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-pm-domains.c | 64 ++++++++++++++++++++-------
>>> include/linux/soc/mediatek/infracfg.h | 6 +++
>>> 2 files changed, 53 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-pm-domains.c b/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-pm-domains.c
>>> index b5e7c9846c34..38f2630bdd0a 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-pm-domains.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-pm-domains.c
>>> @@ -56,8 +56,25 @@
>>>
>>> #define SPM_MAX_BUS_PROT_DATA 3
>>>
>>> +#define _BUS_PROT(_mask, _set, _clr, _sta, _update) { \
>>> + .bus_prot_mask = (_mask), \
>>> + .bus_prot_set = _set, \
>>> + .bus_prot_clr = _clr, \
>>> + .bus_prot_sta = _sta, \
>>> + .bus_prot_reg_update = _update, \
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> +#define BUS_PROT_WR(_mask, _set, _clr, _sta) \
>>> + _BUS_PROT(_mask, _set, _clr, _sta, false)
>>> +
>>> +#define BUS_PROT_UPDATE(_mask, _set, _clr, _sta) \
>>> + _BUS_PROT(_mask, _set, _clr, _sta, true)
>>> +
>>> struct scpsys_bus_prot_data {
>>> u32 bus_prot_mask;
>>> + u32 bus_prot_set;
>>> + u32 bus_prot_clr;
>>> + u32 bus_prot_sta;
>>> bool bus_prot_reg_update;
>>> };
>>>
>>> @@ -69,6 +86,7 @@ struct scpsys_bus_prot_data {
>>> * @sram_pdn_ack_bits: The mask for sram power control acked bits.
>>> * @caps: The flag for active wake-up action.
>>> * @bp_infracfg: bus protection for infracfg subsystem
>>> + * @bp_smi: bus protection for smi subsystem
>>> */
>>> struct scpsys_domain_data {
>>> u32 sta_mask;
>>> @@ -77,6 +95,7 @@ struct scpsys_domain_data {
>>> u32 sram_pdn_ack_bits;
>>> u8 caps;
>>> const struct scpsys_bus_prot_data bp_infracfg[SPM_MAX_BUS_PROT_DATA];
>>> + const struct scpsys_bus_prot_data bp_smi[SPM_MAX_BUS_PROT_DATA];
>>> };
>>>
>>> struct scpsys_domain {
>>> @@ -86,6 +105,7 @@ struct scpsys_domain {
>>> int num_clks;
>>> struct clk_bulk_data *clks;
>>> struct regmap *infracfg;
>>> + struct regmap *smi;
>>> };
>>>
>>> struct scpsys_soc_data {
>>> @@ -175,9 +195,9 @@ static int _scpsys_bus_protect_enable(const struct scpsys_bus_prot_data *bpd, st
>>> if (bpd[i].bus_prot_reg_update)
>>> regmap_update_bits(regmap, INFRA_TOPAXI_PROTECTEN, mask, mask);
>>> else
>>> - regmap_write(regmap, INFRA_TOPAXI_PROTECTEN_SET, mask);
>>> + regmap_write(regmap, bpd[i].bus_prot_set, mask);
>>>
>>> - ret = regmap_read_poll_timeout(regmap, INFRA_TOPAXI_PROTECTSTA1,
>>> + ret = regmap_read_poll_timeout(regmap, bpd[i].bus_prot_sta,
>>> val, (val & mask) == mask,
>>> MTK_POLL_DELAY_US, MTK_POLL_TIMEOUT);
>>> if (ret)
>>> @@ -193,7 +213,11 @@ static int scpsys_bus_protect_enable(struct scpsys_domain *pd)
>>> int ret;
>>>
>>> ret = _scpsys_bus_protect_enable(bpd, pd->infracfg);
>>> - return ret;
>>> + if (ret)
>>> + return ret;
>>> +
>>> + bpd = pd->data->bp_smi;
>>> + return _scpsys_bus_protect_enable(bpd, pd->smi);
>
> Not a huge fan or reusing bpd for 2 different things.
>
> I think this is easier to follow:
>
> _scpsys_bus_protect_enable(pd->data->bp_infracfg, pd->infracfg);
> ...
> _scpsys_bus_protect_enable(pd->data->bp_smi, pd->smi);
>

Sounds reasonable, yes :)

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2020-10-05 12:29    [W:0.087 / U:4.860 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site