All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Esben Haabendal <esben@geanix.com>
To: "Matti Vaittinen" <mazziesaccount@gmail.com>
Cc: "Liam Girdwood" <lgirdwood@gmail.com>,
	 "Mark Brown" <broonie@kernel.org>,
	 <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] regulator: bd718x7: Ensure SNVS power state is used as requested
Date: Sat, 03 May 2025 11:23:22 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87ikmi82ut.fsf@geanix.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2996270f-d03e-45f7-9b6b-c5675c39515b@gmail.com> (Matti Vaittinen's message of "Fri, 02 May 2025 11:20:32 +0300")

"Matti Vaittinen" <mazziesaccount@gmail.com> writes:

> On 02/05/2025 09:46, Esben Haabendal wrote:
>> "Matti Vaittinen" <mazziesaccount@gmail.com> writes:
>>> On 01/05/2025 17:48, Esben Haabendal wrote:
>>>> With the introduction of the rohm,reset-snvs-powered DT binding [2], the
>>>> PMIC settings were only changed when the new property was not found.
>>>>
>>>> As mentioned in [1] the default for BD71387 and BD71847 is to switch to
>>>> SNVS power state on watchdog reset.
>>>
>>> I suppose you mean READY, not SNVS? Commit seems to state:
>>> "By default only wathcdog reset changes state from poweroff to ready."
>>
>> You are absolutely right. Sorry about that.
>>
>>>> So even with rohm,reset-snvs-powered added to DT, a watchdog reset causes
>>>> transitions through READY instead of SNVS.
>>>
>>> The original idea of the rohm,reset-snvs-powered was not to configure
>>> the SNVS to be the target.
>>
>> Makes sense.
>>
>> If we keep it that way, then I think we should change the description of
>> the binding. "Transfer PMIC to SNVS state at reset" tricked at least me
>> into believing it would actually make the kernel setup the PMIC to
>> go to SNVS state at reset.
>>
>> Maybe someething like:
>>
>>      PMIC is configured to go to SNVS state on reset. Bootloader or
>>      something else is responsible for configuring the PMIC to do this.
>>      The driver will not change this configuration when this property is
>>      present.
>
> I am not objecting this. And adding your suggestion at the end of the
> mail should make things, well, not pretty but working.
>
>> I guess back in 2019 when you introduced the rohm,reset-snvs-powered
>> binding you had to keep the code for writing to TRANS_COND1 in the
>> default case for backwards compatibility. But in hindsight, I think the
>> asymetry caused by not doing the same when rohm,reset-snvs-powered is
>> used is what caught me off guard.
>
> Yes, I agree. It should have changed the reset target from the day 1,
> but as I didn't do it right back then ... We now may very well have it
> somewhere it shouldn't be, and changing this is somewhat risky.

Exactly.

>> But that is water under the bridge...
>>
>>> The driver was mostly built to assume that the PMIC has been
>>> configured by earlier stages like uboot, and configs in the driver
>>> were mostly introduced to make power rail enable states controllable
>>> by the software - without risking the rails to be left off. Thus,
>>> AFAIR, the values set by boot (or other power manager MCUs) haven't
>>> been overwritten is the "rohm,reset-snvs-powered" has been found.
>>
>> Got it.
>>
>>> Configuring for example the hardware watchdog related stuff at Linux
>>> driver boot is somewhat late, since watchdog should probably be running
>>> already - and hangs might happen prior the driver probe.
>>
>> Yes. But this specific configuration is not too late to do at driver
>> probe time, although it is better to do it as early as possible.
>>
>>>> And with the default reboot
>>>> method in mxc_restart() is to cause a watchdog reset, we ended up powering
>>>> off the SNVS domains, and thus losing SNVS state such as SNVS RTC and
>>>> LPGPR, on reboots.
>>>>
>>>> With this change, the rohm,reset-snvs-powered property results in the PMIC
>>>> configuration being modified so POWEROFF transitions to SNVS for all reset
>>>> types, including watchdog reset.
>>>
>>> As far as I can say, this change is, in principle, fine. The
>>> "rohm,reset-snvs-powered" shouldn't be populated in the device-tree, if
>>> SNVS is not meant to be used. My only worry is that the BD71837, 47 and
>>> 50 have been on the field since 2018 - and I am not at all sure all the
>>> device-trees are sane...
>>
>> Yes, there is no way to know that fore sure. Even verifying the sanity
>> of the in-tree device-trees will require quite some work.
>>
>>> And if we configure the reset to use SNVS state, then the software
>>> controlled regulators will not turn ON after the reset. Fail to mark
>>> them in the device-tree and the device will be dead until battery is
>>> drained or removed.
>>>
>>> Is there a way for you to set the "target state" at boot SW?
>>
>> As of right now, not really. I am currently stuck with the existing
>> bootloader. I will replace it sometime later, and at that time, I can
>> make it configure the PMIC properly.
>>
>>> I think that should work as the Linux driver won't touch the target
>>> state if rohm,reset-snvs-powered is set(?)
>>
>> That should work, yes.
>>
>>> This is not NACK to the change, this is asking if we had a safer way,
>>> both for other users and also for you (since I still think these configs
>>> should be done prior Linux driver probe)...
>>
>> We could create another device-tree binding to make the driver override
>> PMIC configuration to use SNVS state on reset. But, in order to maintain
>> backwards compatibility with the rohm,reset-snvs-powered, I don't know
>> what to call it without adding more confusion. Maybe something like
>> rohm,force-reset-snvs-powered?
>
> This should keep the existing users happy while also supporting your use
> case. Together with fix to the description of the
> rohm,reset-snvs-powered (as you suggest above), this should work even if
> it's not really pretty. I am not sure how the DT folks see this though.
>
> Another option is to change the rohm,reset-snvs-powered to have a value.
> Something like:
> rohm,reset-snvs-powered = "default"; or
> rohm,reset-snvs-powered = "forced";

I suspect that device-tree maintainers will not accept changing an
existing binding to a different type, as it would break existing
device-trees. In this case changing an already defined boolean property
to an enum type. But I had the same idea :)

>> But although I found the bidning confusing at first, and currently is
>> not able to configure the PMIC before starting Linux, I agree that
>> it is better to have bootloader or something else handle PMIC
>> configuration, so it is setup as early as possible.
>
> Probably yes.

I will start working on bootloader support for these devices next week,
so for what I am concerned, I can live with doing something like
proposed here as a temporary out-of-tree solution.

What do you think, should we leave it in the current state, or can we
figure out a way to allow the driver to actively change the watchdog
reset to go to SNVS power state?

/Esben

  reply	other threads:[~2025-05-03  9:23 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-05-01 14:48 [PATCH] regulator: bd718x7: Ensure SNVS power state is used as requested Esben Haabendal
2025-05-02  5:24 ` Matti Vaittinen
2025-05-02  6:46   ` Esben Haabendal
2025-05-02  8:20     ` Matti Vaittinen
2025-05-03  9:23       ` Esben Haabendal [this message]
2025-05-05  6:07         ` Matti Vaittinen
2025-05-08 17:20           ` Esben Haabendal

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=87ikmi82ut.fsf@geanix.com \
    --to=esben@geanix.com \
    --cc=broonie@kernel.org \
    --cc=lgirdwood@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mazziesaccount@gmail.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: link
Be 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.