From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Henry Chen Subject: Re: [PATCH] soc: mediatek: PMIC wrap: Clear the vldclr if state machine is stay on FSM_VLDCLR state. Date: Thu, 31 Dec 2015 10:09:15 +0800 Message-ID: <1451527755.20140.6.camel@mtksdaap41> References: <1450770677-13557-1-git-send-email-henryc.chen@mediatek.com> <56841C41.4040901@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <56841C41.4040901-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: "Linux-mediatek" Errors-To: linux-mediatek-bounces+glpam-linux-mediatek=m.gmane.org-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org To: Matthias Brugger Cc: Sascha Hauer , linux-mediatek-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org, linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org List-Id: linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org Hi Matthias, On Wed, 2015-12-30 at 19:02 +0100, Matthias Brugger wrote: > > On 22/12/15 08:51, Henry Chen wrote: > > Sometimes PMIC is too busy to send data in time to cause pmic wrap timeout, > > because pmic wrap is waiting for FSM_VLDCLR after finishing WACS2_CMD. It > > just return error when issue happened, so the state machine will stay on > > FSM_VLDCLR state when data send back later by PMIC and timeout again in next > > time because pmic wrap waiting for FSM_IDLE state at the begining of the > > read/write function. > > > > Clear the vldclr when timeout if state machine is stay on FSM_VLDCLR. > > > > Signed-off-by: Henry Chen > > --- > > drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-pmic-wrap.c | 16 ++++++++++++++-- > > 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-pmic-wrap.c b/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-pmic-wrap.c > > index 105597a..ccd5337 100644 > > --- a/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-pmic-wrap.c > > +++ b/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-pmic-wrap.c > > @@ -443,10 +443,16 @@ static int pwrap_wait_for_state(struct pmic_wrapper *wrp, > > static int pwrap_write(struct pmic_wrapper *wrp, u32 adr, u32 wdata) > > { > > int ret; > > + u32 val; > > > > ret = pwrap_wait_for_state(wrp, pwrap_is_fsm_idle); > > - if (ret) > > + if (ret) { > > + /* Clear vldclr bit if state is on the WACS_FSM_WFVLDCLR */ > > + val = pwrap_readl(wrp, PWRAP_WACS2_RDATA); > > + if (PWRAP_GET_WACS_FSM(val) == PWRAP_WACS_FSM_WFVLDCLR) > > + pwrap_writel(wrp, 1, PWRAP_WACS2_VLDCLR); > > return ret; > > + } > > I would prefer to have this encapsulated in a (inline) function. Maybe > with better description then just the one line comment. > > Thanks, > Matthias Ok, I will make the description more clear, do you means write the function like below and used it on pwrap_write/pwrap_read. static inline void pwrap_leave_fsm_vldclr(struct pmic_wrapper *wrp) { if (pwrap_is_fsm_vldclr(wrp)) pwrap_writel(wrp, 1, PWRAP_WACS2_VLDCLR); } Thanks, Henry > > > > > pwrap_writel(wrp, (1 << 31) | ((adr >> 1) << 16) | wdata, > > PWRAP_WACS2_CMD); > > @@ -457,10 +463,16 @@ static int pwrap_write(struct pmic_wrapper *wrp, u32 adr, u32 wdata) > > static int pwrap_read(struct pmic_wrapper *wrp, u32 adr, u32 *rdata) > > { > > int ret; > > + u32 val; > > > > ret = pwrap_wait_for_state(wrp, pwrap_is_fsm_idle); > > - if (ret) > > + if (ret) { > > + /* Clear vldclr bit if state is on the WACS_FSM_WFVLDCLR */ > > + val = pwrap_readl(wrp, PWRAP_WACS2_RDATA); > > + if (PWRAP_GET_WACS_FSM(val) == PWRAP_WACS_FSM_WFVLDCLR) > > + pwrap_writel(wrp, 1, PWRAP_WACS2_VLDCLR); > > return ret; > > + } > > > > pwrap_writel(wrp, (adr >> 1) << 16, PWRAP_WACS2_CMD); > > > >