From: Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@samsung.com>
To: "Christian Kohlschütter" <christian@kohlschutter.com>,
broonie@kernel.org
Cc: heiko@sntech.de, lgirdwood@gmail.com,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org,
linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org, m.reichl@fivetechno.de,
robin.murphy@arm.com, vincent.legoll@gmail.com, wens@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5] regulator: core: Resolve supply name earlier to prevent double-init
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2022 07:55:13 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <367f1076-0eec-85bd-577e-d9302e461d00@samsung.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220825212842.7176-1-christian@kohlschutter.com>
On 25.08.2022 23:28, Christian Kohlschütter wrote:
> Previously, an unresolved regulator supply reference upon calling
> regulator_register on an always-on or boot-on regulator caused
> set_machine_constraints to be called twice.
>
> This in turn may initialize the regulator twice, leading to voltage
> glitches that are timing-dependent. A simple, unrelated configuration
> change may be enough to hide this problem, only to be surfaced by
> chance.
>
> One such example is the SD-Card voltage regulator in a NanoPI R4S that
> would not initialize reliably unless the registration flow was just
> complex enough to allow the regulator to properly reset between calls.
>
> Fix this by re-arranging regulator_register, trying resolve the
> regulator's supply early enough that set_machine_constraints does not
> need to be called twice.
>
> Signed-off-by: Christian Kohlschütter <christian@kohlschutter.com>
Tested-by: Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@samsung.com>
> ---
> drivers/regulator/core.c | 58 ++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------
> 1 file changed, 35 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/regulator/core.c b/drivers/regulator/core.c
> index 77f60eef960..2ff0ab2730f 100644
> --- a/drivers/regulator/core.c
> +++ b/drivers/regulator/core.c
> @@ -5391,6 +5391,7 @@ regulator_register(const struct regulator_desc *regulator_desc,
> bool dangling_of_gpiod = false;
> struct device *dev;
> int ret, i;
> + bool resolved_early = false;
>
> if (cfg == NULL)
> return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);
> @@ -5494,24 +5495,10 @@ regulator_register(const struct regulator_desc *regulator_desc,
> BLOCKING_INIT_NOTIFIER_HEAD(&rdev->notifier);
> INIT_DELAYED_WORK(&rdev->disable_work, regulator_disable_work);
>
> - /* preform any regulator specific init */
> - if (init_data && init_data->regulator_init) {
> - ret = init_data->regulator_init(rdev->reg_data);
> - if (ret < 0)
> - goto clean;
> - }
> -
> - if (config->ena_gpiod) {
> - ret = regulator_ena_gpio_request(rdev, config);
> - if (ret != 0) {
> - rdev_err(rdev, "Failed to request enable GPIO: %pe\n",
> - ERR_PTR(ret));
> - goto clean;
> - }
> - /* The regulator core took over the GPIO descriptor */
> - dangling_cfg_gpiod = false;
> - dangling_of_gpiod = false;
> - }
> + if (init_data && init_data->supply_regulator)
> + rdev->supply_name = init_data->supply_regulator;
> + else if (regulator_desc->supply_name)
> + rdev->supply_name = regulator_desc->supply_name;
>
> /* register with sysfs */
> rdev->dev.class = ®ulator_class;
> @@ -5533,13 +5520,38 @@ regulator_register(const struct regulator_desc *regulator_desc,
> goto wash;
> }
>
> - if (init_data && init_data->supply_regulator)
> - rdev->supply_name = init_data->supply_regulator;
> - else if (regulator_desc->supply_name)
> - rdev->supply_name = regulator_desc->supply_name;
> + if ((rdev->supply_name && !rdev->supply) &&
> + (rdev->constraints->always_on ||
> + rdev->constraints->boot_on)) {
> + ret = regulator_resolve_supply(rdev);
> + if (ret != 0)
> + rdev_dbg(rdev, "Unable to resolve supply early: %pe\n",
> + ERR_PTR(ret));
> +
> + resolved_early = true;
> + }
> +
> + /* perform any regulator specific init */
> + if (init_data && init_data->regulator_init) {
> + ret = init_data->regulator_init(rdev->reg_data);
> + if (ret < 0)
> + goto wash;
> + }
> +
> + if (config->ena_gpiod) {
> + ret = regulator_ena_gpio_request(rdev, config);
> + if (ret != 0) {
> + rdev_err(rdev, "Failed to request enable GPIO: %pe\n",
> + ERR_PTR(ret));
> + goto wash;
> + }
> + /* The regulator core took over the GPIO descriptor */
> + dangling_cfg_gpiod = false;
> + dangling_of_gpiod = false;
> + }
>
> ret = set_machine_constraints(rdev);
> - if (ret == -EPROBE_DEFER) {
> + if (ret == -EPROBE_DEFER && !resolved_early) {
> /* Regulator might be in bypass mode and so needs its supply
> * to set the constraints
> */
Best regards
--
Marek Szyprowski, PhD
Samsung R&D Institute Poland
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-08-26 5:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <CAEwRq=qe+Frwpe=Zr4n_8A6vjOJnV3noegdnHSN7NTazkKejBA@mail.gmail.com>
2022-08-04 10:44 ` [PATCH v3] regulator: core: Resolve supply name earlier to prevent double-init Christian Kohlschütter
2022-08-15 11:17 ` Mark Brown
2022-08-18 12:46 ` [PATCH v4] " Christian Kohlschütter
2022-08-18 15:23 ` Mark Brown
2022-08-25 11:32 ` Marek Szyprowski
2022-08-25 12:21 ` Mark Brown
2022-08-25 14:23 ` Marek Szyprowski
2022-08-25 15:18 ` Christian Kohlschütter
2022-08-25 21:28 ` [PATCH v5] " Christian Kohlschütter
2022-08-25 21:35 ` Christian Kohlschütter
2022-08-26 5:55 ` Marek Szyprowski [this message]
2022-08-29 15:43 ` Mark Brown
2022-08-29 17:01 ` Christian Kohlschütter
2023-02-17 23:22 ` Saravana Kannan
2023-02-17 23:33 ` Christian Kohlschütter
2023-02-17 23:46 ` Saravana Kannan
2023-02-18 0:01 ` Christian Kohlschütter
2023-02-18 0:05 ` Saravana Kannan
2022-08-18 15:22 ` [PATCH v3] " Mark Brown
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=367f1076-0eec-85bd-577e-d9302e461d00@samsung.com \
--to=m.szyprowski@samsung.com \
--cc=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=christian@kohlschutter.com \
--cc=heiko@sntech.de \
--cc=lgirdwood@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=m.reichl@fivetechno.de \
--cc=robin.murphy@arm.com \
--cc=vincent.legoll@gmail.com \
--cc=wens@kernel.org \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox