From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 68F5AC19F2B for ; Mon, 1 Aug 2022 06:45:53 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=Sender: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post: List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:References: Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description: Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID: List-Owner; bh=HD4kpTHz86+dlXaW9XIdibRCUmlHnZiSfqxyMfaLXwQ=; b=0eBge5Yd0cwH+N VSyR+gByHB+Hn6hZehL1Ufw+5r0gYQYv2RA/B2irFNT0hbRM7NDMQV+ZukDDrn0ZqAN1OzARKK7V2 t1V+yzsXk0TmuKupMzhz6fGod7fS6O28NdaMuGPX+SQjEopwtddjw0nJSluUqWgltkHxJ8tfd/bka kOH8d/6sDld8WSwYsIFvivzi6FSOcWGGNftSfSFxJIUZqcnY3DOlzbFOCjI6z/bTmzm/dr7pRWE0l tIt7iiuV8+qJJayqyEY2PEK56Tsfp6Mc3ty2rxHr5F/t3r7QfaijeLgk6hkWcXNd80AN+WQ5NroVM T2EkikxB0NvpfmcThw1g==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.94.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1oIPAO-00349y-U6; Mon, 01 Aug 2022 06:44:41 +0000 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.110.172]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.94.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1oIPAK-00341C-3D for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Mon, 01 Aug 2022 06:44:38 +0000 Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D865A1515; Sun, 31 Jul 2022 23:44:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from e120937-lin (unknown [172.31.20.19]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D94B73F73B; Sun, 31 Jul 2022 23:44:27 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 1 Aug 2022 07:44:21 +0100 From: Cristian Marussi To: Arun KS Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, sudeep.holla@arm.com, james.quinlan@broadcom.com, Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com, f.fainelli@gmail.com, vincent.guittot@linaro.org, souvik.chakravarty@arm.com, peter.hilber@opensynergy.com Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 14/16] firmware: arm_scmi: Add testing Voltage protocol support Message-ID: References: <20220227205608.30812-1-cristian.marussi@arm.com> <20220227205608.30812-15-cristian.marussi@arm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20220731_234436_357742_DA276C56 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 29.09 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On Mon, Aug 01, 2022 at 10:17:00AM +0530, Arun KS wrote: > Hi Cristian, > Hi Arun, first of all thanks for the feedback ! > On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 4:23 AM Cristian Marussi > wrote: > > > > firmware: arm_scmi: Add testing Voltage protocol support > > > > Signed-off-by: Cristian Marussi > > --- > > .../arm_scmi/scmi_test_driver/Makefile | 2 +- > > .../arm_scmi/scmi_test_driver/scmi_test.c | 2 + > > .../arm_scmi/scmi_test_driver/test_common.h | 1 + > > .../arm_scmi/scmi_test_driver/test_voltages.c | 51 +++++++++++++++++++ > > 4 files changed, 55 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > create mode 100644 drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/scmi_test_driver/test_voltages.c > > > > diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/scmi_test_driver/Makefile b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/scmi_test_driver/Makefile > > index 68a3d94a6a88..3b7df18de250 100644 > > --- a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/scmi_test_driver/Makefile > > +++ b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/scmi_test_driver/Makefile > > @@ -1,5 +1,5 @@ > > # SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only > > scmi_test_driver-objs := scmi_test.o test_common.o test_clocks.o test_sensors.o \ > > - test_powers.o > > + test_powers.o test_voltages.o > > obj-$(CONFIG_ARM_SCMI_TEST_DRIVER) += scmi_test_driver.o > > > > diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/scmi_test_driver/scmi_test.c b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/scmi_test_driver/scmi_test.c > > index df0d3e572010..2ca9f82c5bf3 100644 > > --- a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/scmi_test_driver/scmi_test.c > > +++ b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/scmi_test_driver/scmi_test.c > > @@ -26,6 +26,7 @@ int (*scmi_test_init[SCMI_MAX_PROTOCOLS])(struct scmi_test_setup *) = { > > [SCMI_PROTOCOL_POWER] = scmi_test_power_init, > > [SCMI_PROTOCOL_CLOCK] = scmi_test_clock_init, > > [SCMI_PROTOCOL_SENSOR] = scmi_test_sensor_init, > > + [SCMI_PROTOCOL_VOLTAGE] = scmi_test_voltage_init, > > }; > > > > static void > > @@ -125,6 +126,7 @@ static int scmi_testing_probe(struct scmi_device *sdev) > > } > > > > static const struct scmi_device_id scmi_id_table[] = { > > + { SCMI_PROTOCOL_VOLTAGE, "__scmi_test-voltage" }, > > { SCMI_PROTOCOL_CLOCK, "__scmi_test-clock" }, > > { SCMI_PROTOCOL_SENSOR, "__scmi_test-sensor" }, > > { SCMI_PROTOCOL_POWER, "__scmi_test-power" }, > > diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/scmi_test_driver/test_common.h b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/scmi_test_driver/test_common.h > > index 9f3d35ba4477..338b65da593f 100644 > > --- a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/scmi_test_driver/test_common.h > > +++ b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/scmi_test_driver/test_common.h > > @@ -102,6 +102,7 @@ int scmi_test_release(struct inode *ino, struct file *filp); > > > > int scmi_test_clock_init(struct scmi_test_setup *tsp); > > int scmi_test_sensor_init(struct scmi_test_setup *tsp); > > +int scmi_test_voltage_init(struct scmi_test_setup *tsp); > > int scmi_test_power_init(struct scmi_test_setup *tsp); > > > > #endif /* __SCMI_TEST_COMMON_H */ > > diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/scmi_test_driver/test_voltages.c b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/scmi_test_driver/test_voltages.c > > new file mode 100644 > > index 000000000000..ab91080e3a0f > > --- /dev/null > > +++ b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/scmi_test_driver/test_voltages.c > > @@ -0,0 +1,51 @@ > > +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 > > +/* > > + * SCMI Testing Driver - Voltage Protocol > > + * > > + * Copyright (C) 2022 ARM Ltd. > > + */ > > + > > +#include > > +#include > > +#include > > +#include > > +#include > > +#include > > +#include > > +#include > > +#include > > + > > +#include "test_common.h" > > + > > +struct scmi_voltage_data { > > + unsigned int version; > > + int count; > > +}; > > + > > +int scmi_test_voltage_init(struct scmi_test_setup *tsp) > > +{ > > + struct scmi_voltage_data *vdata; > > + struct device *dev = &tsp->sdev->dev; > > + const struct scmi_voltage_proto_ops *voltage_ops; > > + > > + vdata = devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof(*vdata), GFP_KERNEL); > > + if (!vdata) > > + return -ENOMEM; > > + > > + voltage_ops = tsp->ops; > > + vdata->version = voltage_ops->version_get(tsp->ph); > > + vdata->count = voltage_ops->num_domains_get(tsp->ph); > > + > > + if (vdata->count <= 0) { > > + dev_err(dev, "number of voltage doms invalid: %d\n", > > + vdata->count); > > + return vdata->count ?: -EINVAL; > > + } > > + > > + dev_info(dev, "Found %d voltage resources.\n", vdata->count); > > + > > + tsp->priv = vdata; > > + debugfs_create_x32("version", 0400, tsp->parent, &vdata->version); > Any particular reason, why we are not creating debugfs entires for > regulator level_get/level_set like it was done for > clocks(rate_get_set)? No, it is just that this RFC initial series was meant to gather feedback on this approach at testing and to experiment with this solution itself a bit, before committing more work to more extensive cover all SCMI protocols and ops... so the series is 'incomplete' by design :P ... having said that, despite the series had not received so much feedback at the end, I have worked in the background on extending its SCMI coverage, so that now I can support all SCMI protocols (exposing all ops on debugfs) ... I'll plan to post a new more extensive series in the near(-ish) future once I'll have the time to clean it up and add more example KSFT testcases (and fix the dummy ones ...) Thanks, Cristian _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel