From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andrew Duggan Subject: Re: [PATCH] HID: rmi: Write updated F11 control registers after reset Date: Thu, 9 Jul 2015 17:41:28 -0700 Message-ID: <559F14B8.6010705@synaptics.com> References: <1436480057-23774-1-git-send-email-aduggan@synaptics.com> <2172572.685fORisNy@xps13> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from us-mx2.synaptics.com ([192.147.44.131]:44526 "EHLO us-mx1.synaptics.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751346AbbGJAle (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Jul 2015 20:41:34 -0400 In-Reply-To: <2172572.685fORisNy@xps13> Sender: linux-input-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-input@vger.kernel.org To: Gabriele Mazzotta Cc: linux-input@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jiri Kosina , Benjamin Tissoires On 07/09/2015 03:40 PM, Gabriele Mazzotta wrote: > On Thursday 09 July 2015 15:14:17 Andrew Duggan wrote: >> When a device is reset the values of control registers will be reset to >> the defaults. This patch reapplies the control register values set for F11 >> by the driver. > Hi, > > thanks for this, it works as intended. I just added a couple of > comments here below, but other than that > > Tested-by: Gabriele Mazzotta Thanks for testing! >> Signed-off-by: Andrew Duggan >> --- >> drivers/hid/hid-rmi.c | 41 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------- >> 1 file changed, 34 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/hid/hid-rmi.c b/drivers/hid/hid-rmi.c >> index af191a2..80c068f 100644 >> --- a/drivers/hid/hid-rmi.c >> +++ b/drivers/hid/hid-rmi.c >> @@ -40,6 +40,8 @@ >> #define RMI_DEVICE BIT(0) >> #define RMI_DEVICE_HAS_PHYS_BUTTONS BIT(1) >> >> +#define RMI_F11_CTRL_REG_COUNT 12 >> + >> enum rmi_mode_type { >> RMI_MODE_OFF = 0, >> RMI_MODE_ATTN_REPORTS = 1, >> @@ -116,6 +118,8 @@ struct rmi_data { >> unsigned int max_y; >> unsigned int x_size_mm; >> unsigned int y_size_mm; >> + bool read_f11_ctrl_regs; >> + u8 f11_ctrl_regs[RMI_F11_CTRL_REG_COUNT]; >> >> unsigned int gpio_led_count; >> unsigned int button_count; >> @@ -557,6 +561,15 @@ static int rmi_set_sleep_mode(struct hid_device *hdev, int sleep_mode) >> >> static int rmi_suspend(struct hid_device *hdev, pm_message_t message) >> { >> + struct rmi_data *data = hid_get_drvdata(hdev); >> + int ret; >> + >> + ret = rmi_read_block(hdev, data->f11.control_base_addr, >> + data->f11_ctrl_regs, RMI_F11_CTRL_REG_COUNT); >> + if (ret) >> + hid_warn(hdev, "can not read F11 control registers\n"); > It seems that rmi_read_block() can fail because of timeouts after it > has started filling the buffer, so isn't it better to set > read_f11_ctrl_regs to false when it happens? > Another option would be to create a local buffer for the read and only copy it to data->f11_ctrl_regs if we get all of the bytes. That way we can ensure that rmi_post_reset will have a valid set of registers to restore. Or we could also just remove the read from the suspend callback altogether and just write the values we set in rmi_populate_f11 and not worry about changes made outside the driver. >> + >> + >> if (!device_may_wakeup(hdev->dev.parent)) >> return rmi_set_sleep_mode(hdev, RMI_SLEEP_DEEP_SLEEP); >> >> @@ -565,6 +578,7 @@ static int rmi_suspend(struct hid_device *hdev, pm_message_t message) >> >> static int rmi_post_reset(struct hid_device *hdev) >> { >> + struct rmi_data *data = hid_get_drvdata(hdev); >> int ret; >> >> ret = rmi_set_mode(hdev, RMI_MODE_ATTN_REPORTS); >> @@ -573,6 +587,14 @@ static int rmi_post_reset(struct hid_device *hdev) >> return ret; >> } >> >> + if (data->read_f11_ctrl_regs) { >> + ret = rmi_write_block(hdev, data->f11.control_base_addr, >> + data->f11_ctrl_regs, RMI_F11_CTRL_REG_COUNT); >> + if (ret) >> + hid_warn(hdev, >> + "can not write F11 control registers after reset\n"); >> + } >> + >> if (!device_may_wakeup(hdev->dev.parent)) { >> ret = rmi_set_sleep_mode(hdev, RMI_SLEEP_NORMAL); >> if (ret) { >> @@ -963,18 +985,23 @@ static int rmi_populate_f11(struct hid_device *hdev) >> * and there is no way to know if the first 20 bytes are here or not. >> * We use only the first 12 bytes, so get only them. >> */ > Just a suggestion here. What about moving this comment right above the > definition of RMI_F11_CTRL_REG_COUNT? That makes sense. I can make this change in my v2. >> - ret = rmi_read_block(hdev, data->f11.control_base_addr, buf, 12); >> + ret = rmi_read_block(hdev, data->f11.control_base_addr, >> + data->f11_ctrl_regs, RMI_F11_CTRL_REG_COUNT); >> if (ret) { >> hid_err(hdev, "can not read ctrl block of size 11: %d.\n", ret); >> return ret; >> } >> >> - data->max_x = buf[6] | (buf[7] << 8); >> - data->max_y = buf[8] | (buf[9] << 8); >> + /* data->f11_ctrl_regs now contains valid register data */ >> + data->read_f11_ctrl_regs = true; >> + >> + data->max_x = data->f11_ctrl_regs[6] | (data->f11_ctrl_regs[7] << 8); >> + data->max_y = data->f11_ctrl_regs[8] | (data->f11_ctrl_regs[9] << 8); >> >> if (has_dribble) { >> - buf[0] = buf[0] & ~BIT(6); >> - ret = rmi_write(hdev, data->f11.control_base_addr, buf); >> + data->f11_ctrl_regs[0] = data->f11_ctrl_regs[0] & ~BIT(6); >> + ret = rmi_write(hdev, data->f11.control_base_addr, >> + data->f11_ctrl_regs); >> if (ret) { >> hid_err(hdev, "can not write to control reg 0: %d.\n", >> ret); >> @@ -983,9 +1010,9 @@ static int rmi_populate_f11(struct hid_device *hdev) >> } >> >> if (has_palm_detect) { >> - buf[11] = buf[11] & ~BIT(0); >> + data->f11_ctrl_regs[11] = data->f11_ctrl_regs[11] & ~BIT(0); >> ret = rmi_write(hdev, data->f11.control_base_addr + 11, >> - &buf[11]); >> + &data->f11_ctrl_regs[11]); >> if (ret) { >> hid_err(hdev, "can not write to control reg 11: %d.\n", >> ret); >> Andrew