Re: [PATCH 8/8] power: bq27xxx_battery: Cleanup health checking

Andrew F. Davis
2015-07-24T20:28:10Z

On 07/23/2015 11:22 AM, Pali Rohár wrote:
> On Wednesday 22 July 2015 16:52:00 Andrew F. Davis wrote:
>> Reorganize the logic checking battery health and under temperature
>> condition checking.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Andrew F. Davis <afd@ti.com>
>> ---
>> drivers/power/bq27xxx_battery.c | 62 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------------
>> 1 file changed, 41 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/power/bq27xxx_battery.c b/drivers/power/bq27xxx_battery.c
>> index f148222..6775f65 100644
>> --- a/drivers/power/bq27xxx_battery.c
>> +++ b/drivers/power/bq27xxx_battery.c
>> @@ -54,6 +54,8 @@
>> #define BQ27XXX_FLAG_FC BIT(9)
>> #define BQ27XXX_FLAG_OTD BIT(14)
>> #define BQ27XXX_FLAG_OTC BIT(15)
>> +#define BQ27XXX_FLAG_UT BIT(14)
>> +#define BQ27XXX_FLAG_OT BIT(15)
>>
>> /* BQ27000 has different layout for Flags register */
>> #define BQ27000_FLAG_EDVF BIT(0) /* Final End-of-Discharge-Voltage flag */
>> @@ -624,10 +626,34 @@ static int bq27xxx_battery_read_pwr_avg(struct bq27xxx_device_info *di)
>> */
>> static int bq27xxx_battery_overtemp(struct bq27xxx_device_info *di, u16 flags)
>> {
>> - if (di->chip == BQ27500 || di->chip == BQ27541)
>> + if (di->chip == BQ27500 || di->chip == BQ27541 || di->chip == BQ27545)
>> return flags & (BQ27XXX_FLAG_OTC | BQ27XXX_FLAG_OTD);
>> + if (di->chip == BQ27530 || di->chip == BQ27421)
>> + return flags & BQ27XXX_FLAG_OT;
>> +
>> + return false;
>> +}
>> +
>> +/*
>> + * Returns true if a battery under temperature condition is detected
>> + */
>> +static int bq27xxx_battery_undertemp(struct bq27xxx_device_info *di, u16 flags)
>> +{
>> + if (di->chip == BQ27530 || di->chip == BQ27421)
>> + return flags & BQ27XXX_FLAG_UT;
>> +
>> + return false;
>> +}
>> +
>> +/*
>> + * Returns true if a low state of charge condition is detected
>> + */
>> +static int bq27xxx_battery_dead(struct bq27xxx_device_info *di, u16 flags)
>> +{
>> + if (di->chip == BQ27000 || di->chip == BQ27010)
>> + return flags & (BQ27000_FLAG_EDV1 | BQ27000_FLAG_EDVF);
>> else
>> - return flags & BQ27XXX_FLAG_OTC;
>> + return flags & (BQ27XXX_FLAG_SOC1 | BQ27XXX_FLAG_SOCF);
>> }
>>
>> /*
>> @@ -636,29 +662,23 @@ static int bq27xxx_battery_overtemp(struct bq27xxx_device_info *di, u16 flags)
>> */
>> static int bq27xxx_battery_read_health(struct bq27xxx_device_info *di)
>> {
>> - u16 tval;
>> + u16 flags;
>>
>> - tval = bq27xxx_read(di, BQ27XXX_REG_FLAGS, false);
>> - if (tval < 0) {
>> - dev_err(di->dev, "error reading flag register:%d\n", tval);
>> - return tval;
>> + flags = bq27xxx_read(di, BQ27XXX_REG_FLAGS, false);
>> + if (flags < 0) {
>> + dev_err(di->dev, "error reading flag register:%d\n", flags);
>> + return flags;
>> }
>>
>> - if (di->chip == BQ27000 || di->chip == BQ27010) {
>> - if (tval & BQ27000_FLAG_EDV1)
>> - tval = POWER_SUPPLY_HEALTH_DEAD;
>> - else
>> - tval = POWER_SUPPLY_HEALTH_GOOD;
>> - } else {
>> - if (tval & BQ27XXX_FLAG_SOCF)
>> - tval = POWER_SUPPLY_HEALTH_DEAD;
>> - else if (bq27xxx_battery_overtemp(di, tval))
>> - tval = POWER_SUPPLY_HEALTH_OVERHEAT;
>> - else
>> - tval = POWER_SUPPLY_HEALTH_GOOD;
>> - }
>> + /* Unlikely but important to return first */
>> + if (bq27xxx_battery_overtemp(di, flags))
>> + return POWER_SUPPLY_HEALTH_OVERHEAT;
>> + if (bq27xxx_battery_undertemp(di, flags))
>> + return POWER_SUPPLY_HEALTH_COLD;
>> + if (bq27xxx_battery_dead(di, flags))
>> + return POWER_SUPPLY_HEALTH_DEAD;
>
> Good candidates for "if (unlikely(...))" ?
>

I wasn't sure, but I don't see why not. Added.

Thanks,
Andrew

>>
>> - return tval;
>> + return POWER_SUPPLY_HEALTH_GOOD;
>> }
>>
>> static void bq27xxx_battery_update(struct bq27xxx_device_info *di)
>