[PATCH -next] mfd: ntxec: Support for EC in Tolino Shine 2 HD

[PATCH -next] mfd: ntxec: Support for EC in Tolino Shine 2 HD

[Andreas Kemnade]

Add the version of the EC in the Tolino Shine 2 HD
to the supported versions. It seems not to have an RTC
and does not ack data written to it.
The vendor kernel happily ignores write errors, using
I2C via userspace i2c-set also shows the error.
So add a quirk to ignore that error.

PWM can be successfully configured despite of that error.

Signed-off-by: Andreas Kemnade <andreas@kemnade.info>
---
 drivers/mfd/ntxec.c       | 57 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
 include/linux/mfd/ntxec.h |  1 +
 2 files changed, 55 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/mfd/ntxec.c b/drivers/mfd/ntxec.c
index 957de2b03529..e7fe570127af 100644
--- a/drivers/mfd/ntxec.c
+++ b/drivers/mfd/ntxec.c
@@ -96,6 +96,36 @@ static struct notifier_block ntxec_restart_handler = {
 	.priority = 128,
 };
 
+static int regmap_ignore_write(void *context,
+			       unsigned int reg, unsigned int val)
+
+{
+	struct regmap *regmap = context;
+
+	regmap_write(regmap, reg, val);
+
+	return 0;
+}
+
+static int regmap_wrap_read(void *context, unsigned int reg,
+			    unsigned int *val)
+{
+	struct regmap *regmap = context;
+
+	return regmap_read(regmap, reg, val);
+}
+
+/* some firmware versions do not ack written data, add a wrapper */
+static const struct regmap_config regmap_config_noack = {
+	.name = "ntxec_noack",
+	.reg_bits = 8,
+	.val_bits = 16,
+	.cache_type = REGCACHE_NONE,
+	.val_format_endian = REGMAP_ENDIAN_BIG,
+	.reg_write = regmap_ignore_write,
+	.reg_read = regmap_wrap_read
+};
+
 static const struct regmap_config regmap_config = {
 	.name = "ntxec",
 	.reg_bits = 8,
@@ -109,10 +139,15 @@ static const struct mfd_cell ntxec_subdevices[] = {
 	{ .name = "ntxec-pwm" },
 };
 
+static const struct mfd_cell ntxec_subdev_pwm[] = {
+	{ .name = "ntxec-pwm" },
+};
+
 static int ntxec_probe(struct i2c_client *client)
 {
 	struct ntxec *ec;
 	unsigned int version;
+	bool has_rtc;
 	int res;
 
 	ec = devm_kmalloc(&client->dev, sizeof(*ec), GFP_KERNEL);
@@ -137,6 +172,15 @@ static int ntxec_probe(struct i2c_client *client)
 	/* Bail out if we encounter an unknown firmware version */
 	switch (version) {
 	case NTXEC_VERSION_KOBO_AURA:
+		has_rtc = true;
+		break;
+	case NTXEC_VERSION_TOLINO_SHINE2:
+		has_rtc = false;
+		ec->regmap = devm_regmap_init(ec->dev, NULL,
+					      ec->regmap,
+					      &regmap_config_noack);
+		if (IS_ERR(ec->regmap))
+			return PTR_ERR(ec->regmap);
 		break;
 	default:
 		dev_err(ec->dev,
@@ -155,7 +199,6 @@ static int ntxec_probe(struct i2c_client *client)
 		 */
 		res = regmap_write(ec->regmap, NTXEC_REG_POWERKEEP,
 				   NTXEC_POWERKEEP_VALUE);
-		if (res < 0)
 			return res;
 
 		if (poweroff_restart_client)
@@ -181,8 +224,16 @@ static int ntxec_probe(struct i2c_client *client)
 
 	i2c_set_clientdata(client, ec);
 
-	res = devm_mfd_add_devices(ec->dev, PLATFORM_DEVID_NONE, ntxec_subdevices,
-				   ARRAY_SIZE(ntxec_subdevices), NULL, 0, NULL);
+	if (has_rtc)
+		res = devm_mfd_add_devices(ec->dev, PLATFORM_DEVID_NONE,
+					   ntxec_subdevices,
+					   ARRAY_SIZE(ntxec_subdevices),
+					   NULL, 0, NULL);
+	else
+		res = devm_mfd_add_devices(ec->dev, PLATFORM_DEVID_NONE,
+					   ntxec_subdev_pwm,
+					   ARRAY_SIZE(ntxec_subdev_pwm),
+					   NULL, 0, NULL);
 	if (res)
 		dev_err(ec->dev, "Failed to add subdevices: %d\n", res);
 
diff --git a/include/linux/mfd/ntxec.h b/include/linux/mfd/ntxec.h
index 361204d125f1..26ab3b8eb612 100644
--- a/include/linux/mfd/ntxec.h
+++ b/include/linux/mfd/ntxec.h
@@ -33,5 +33,6 @@ static inline __be16 ntxec_reg8(u8 value)
 
 /* Known firmware versions */
 #define NTXEC_VERSION_KOBO_AURA	0xd726	/* found in Kobo Aura */
+#define NTXEC_VERSION_TOLINO_SHINE2 0xf110 /* found in Tolino Shine 2 HD */
 
 #endif
-- 
2.29.2

Re: [PATCH -next] mfd: ntxec: Support for EC in Tolino Shine 2 HD

[Jonathan Neuschäfer]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 5232 bytes --]

Hi,

(Cc'ing Mark Brown because of the regmap related questions)

On Sat, Mar 06, 2021 at 07:13:14PM +0100, Andreas Kemnade wrote:
> Add the version of the EC in the Tolino Shine 2 HD
> to the supported versions. It seems not to have an RTC
> and does not ack data written to it.
> The vendor kernel happily ignores write errors, using
> I2C via userspace i2c-set also shows the error.
> So add a quirk to ignore that error.
> 
> PWM can be successfully configured despite of that error.

I'm curious, is this one of the variants with two PWM channels
(for configurable color temperature)?

> 
> Signed-off-by: Andreas Kemnade <andreas@kemnade.info>
> ---
>  drivers/mfd/ntxec.c       | 57 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
>  include/linux/mfd/ntxec.h |  1 +
>  2 files changed, 55 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/mfd/ntxec.c b/drivers/mfd/ntxec.c
> index 957de2b03529..e7fe570127af 100644
> --- a/drivers/mfd/ntxec.c
> +++ b/drivers/mfd/ntxec.c
> @@ -96,6 +96,36 @@ static struct notifier_block ntxec_restart_handler = {
>  	.priority = 128,
>  };
>  
> +static int regmap_ignore_write(void *context,
> +			       unsigned int reg, unsigned int val)
> +
> +{
> +	struct regmap *regmap = context;
> +
> +	regmap_write(regmap, reg, val);
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int regmap_wrap_read(void *context, unsigned int reg,
> +			    unsigned int *val)
> +{
> +	struct regmap *regmap = context;
> +
> +	return regmap_read(regmap, reg, val);
> +}
> +
> +/* some firmware versions do not ack written data, add a wrapper */
> +static const struct regmap_config regmap_config_noack = {
> +	.name = "ntxec_noack",
> +	.reg_bits = 8,
> +	.val_bits = 16,
> +	.cache_type = REGCACHE_NONE,
> +	.val_format_endian = REGMAP_ENDIAN_BIG,
> +	.reg_write = regmap_ignore_write,
> +	.reg_read = regmap_wrap_read

Is the read wrapper necessary? It seems to me from reading regmap.h
that leaving .reg_read set to NULL should do the right thing, but I'm
not sure.

> +};
> +
>  static const struct regmap_config regmap_config = {
>  	.name = "ntxec",
>  	.reg_bits = 8,
> @@ -109,10 +139,15 @@ static const struct mfd_cell ntxec_subdevices[] = {
>  	{ .name = "ntxec-pwm" },
>  };
>  
> +static const struct mfd_cell ntxec_subdev_pwm[] = {
> +	{ .name = "ntxec-pwm" },
> +};

ntxec_subdevices vs. ntxec_subdev_pwm seems slightly inconsistent in
naming. ntxec_subdevices_pwm would be a wrong plural, but IMHO slightly
better because of consistency. Maybe rename ntxec_subdevices to
ntxec_subdev?

> +
>  static int ntxec_probe(struct i2c_client *client)
>  {
>  	struct ntxec *ec;
>  	unsigned int version;
> +	bool has_rtc;
>  	int res;
>  
>  	ec = devm_kmalloc(&client->dev, sizeof(*ec), GFP_KERNEL);
> @@ -137,6 +172,15 @@ static int ntxec_probe(struct i2c_client *client)
>  	/* Bail out if we encounter an unknown firmware version */
>  	switch (version) {
>  	case NTXEC_VERSION_KOBO_AURA:
> +		has_rtc = true;
> +		break;
> +	case NTXEC_VERSION_TOLINO_SHINE2:
> +		has_rtc = false;
> +		ec->regmap = devm_regmap_init(ec->dev, NULL,
> +					      ec->regmap,
> +					      &regmap_config_noack);

Ah— A custom regmap stacked on top of the old regmap… I think this
deserves a comment.

> +		if (IS_ERR(ec->regmap))
> +			return PTR_ERR(ec->regmap);
>  		break;
>  	default:
>  		dev_err(ec->dev,
> @@ -155,7 +199,6 @@ static int ntxec_probe(struct i2c_client *client)
>  		 */
>  		res = regmap_write(ec->regmap, NTXEC_REG_POWERKEEP,
>  				   NTXEC_POWERKEEP_VALUE);
> -		if (res < 0)
>  			return res;

This deletion looks like a mistake.

>  
>  		if (poweroff_restart_client)
> @@ -181,8 +224,16 @@ static int ntxec_probe(struct i2c_client *client)
>  
>  	i2c_set_clientdata(client, ec);
>  
> -	res = devm_mfd_add_devices(ec->dev, PLATFORM_DEVID_NONE, ntxec_subdevices,
> -				   ARRAY_SIZE(ntxec_subdevices), NULL, 0, NULL);
> +	if (has_rtc)
> +		res = devm_mfd_add_devices(ec->dev, PLATFORM_DEVID_NONE,
> +					   ntxec_subdevices,
> +					   ARRAY_SIZE(ntxec_subdevices),
> +					   NULL, 0, NULL);
> +	else
> +		res = devm_mfd_add_devices(ec->dev, PLATFORM_DEVID_NONE,
> +					   ntxec_subdev_pwm,
> +					   ARRAY_SIZE(ntxec_subdev_pwm),
> +					   NULL, 0, NULL);

At some point, it will probably be simpler to have

	struct mfd_cell *subdev = ntxec_subdevices;
	size_t subdev_size = ARRAY_SIZE(ntxec_subdevices);

on top of the probe function and override them in the switch statement,
but at this point I think it doesn't matter, and either way is fine.

>  	if (res)
>  		dev_err(ec->dev, "Failed to add subdevices: %d\n", res);
>  
> diff --git a/include/linux/mfd/ntxec.h b/include/linux/mfd/ntxec.h
> index 361204d125f1..26ab3b8eb612 100644
> --- a/include/linux/mfd/ntxec.h
> +++ b/include/linux/mfd/ntxec.h
> @@ -33,5 +33,6 @@ static inline __be16 ntxec_reg8(u8 value)
>  
>  /* Known firmware versions */
>  #define NTXEC_VERSION_KOBO_AURA	0xd726	/* found in Kobo Aura */
> +#define NTXEC_VERSION_TOLINO_SHINE2 0xf110 /* found in Tolino Shine 2 HD */
>  
>  #endif
> -- 
> 2.29.2
> 


Thanks for your patch,
Jonathan

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

Re: [PATCH -next] mfd: ntxec: Support for EC in Tolino Shine 2 HD

[Andreas Kemnade]

On Sat, 6 Mar 2021 20:14:46 +0100
Jonathan Neuschäfer <j.neuschaefer@gmx.net> wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> (Cc'ing Mark Brown because of the regmap related questions)
> 
> On Sat, Mar 06, 2021 at 07:13:14PM +0100, Andreas Kemnade wrote:
> > Add the version of the EC in the Tolino Shine 2 HD
> > to the supported versions. It seems not to have an RTC
> > and does not ack data written to it.
> > The vendor kernel happily ignores write errors, using
> > I2C via userspace i2c-set also shows the error.
> > So add a quirk to ignore that error.
> > 
> > PWM can be successfully configured despite of that error.  
> 
> I'm curious, is this one of the variants with two PWM channels
> (for configurable color temperature)?
> 
No. Tolino Shine 3 and Kobo Clara HD have such things. There you have a
/sys/class/backlight/backlight_{cold,warm}.

> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Andreas Kemnade <andreas@kemnade.info>
> > ---
> >  drivers/mfd/ntxec.c       | 57 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
> >  include/linux/mfd/ntxec.h |  1 +
> >  2 files changed, 55 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/mfd/ntxec.c b/drivers/mfd/ntxec.c
> > index 957de2b03529..e7fe570127af 100644
> > --- a/drivers/mfd/ntxec.c
> > +++ b/drivers/mfd/ntxec.c
> > @@ -96,6 +96,36 @@ static struct notifier_block ntxec_restart_handler = {
> >  	.priority = 128,
> >  };
> >  
> > +static int regmap_ignore_write(void *context,
> > +			       unsigned int reg, unsigned int val)
> > +
> > +{
> > +	struct regmap *regmap = context;
> > +
> > +	regmap_write(regmap, reg, val);
> > +
> > +	return 0;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static int regmap_wrap_read(void *context, unsigned int reg,
> > +			    unsigned int *val)
> > +{
> > +	struct regmap *regmap = context;
> > +
> > +	return regmap_read(regmap, reg, val);
> > +}
> > +
> > +/* some firmware versions do not ack written data, add a wrapper */
> > +static const struct regmap_config regmap_config_noack = {
> > +	.name = "ntxec_noack",
> > +	.reg_bits = 8,
> > +	.val_bits = 16,
> > +	.cache_type = REGCACHE_NONE,
> > +	.val_format_endian = REGMAP_ENDIAN_BIG,
> > +	.reg_write = regmap_ignore_write,
> > +	.reg_read = regmap_wrap_read  
> 
> Is the read wrapper necessary? It seems to me from reading regmap.h
> that leaving .reg_read set to NULL should do the right thing, but I'm
> not sure.
>
well if we want to read from it, there need to be some function for it.
But if... I do not see anything worth to read besides of version.
I think we can leave ouf val_format_endian because a lot of stuff is
bypassed if no bus is set in regmap_init().
There is e.g. a goto skip_format_initialization.

> > +};
> > +
> >  static const struct regmap_config regmap_config = {
> >  	.name = "ntxec",
> >  	.reg_bits = 8,
> > @@ -109,10 +139,15 @@ static const struct mfd_cell ntxec_subdevices[] = {
> >  	{ .name = "ntxec-pwm" },
> >  };
> >  
> > +static const struct mfd_cell ntxec_subdev_pwm[] = {
> > +	{ .name = "ntxec-pwm" },
> > +};  
> 
> ntxec_subdevices vs. ntxec_subdev_pwm seems slightly inconsistent in
> naming. ntxec_subdevices_pwm would be a wrong plural, but IMHO slightly
> better because of consistency. Maybe rename ntxec_subdevices to
> ntxec_subdev?
> 
yes, I will change it.

> > +
> >  static int ntxec_probe(struct i2c_client *client)
> >  {
> >  	struct ntxec *ec;
> >  	unsigned int version;
> > +	bool has_rtc;
> >  	int res;
> >  
> >  	ec = devm_kmalloc(&client->dev, sizeof(*ec), GFP_KERNEL);
> > @@ -137,6 +172,15 @@ static int ntxec_probe(struct i2c_client *client)
> >  	/* Bail out if we encounter an unknown firmware version */
> >  	switch (version) {
> >  	case NTXEC_VERSION_KOBO_AURA:
> > +		has_rtc = true;
> > +		break;
> > +	case NTXEC_VERSION_TOLINO_SHINE2:
> > +		has_rtc = false;
> > +		ec->regmap = devm_regmap_init(ec->dev, NULL,
> > +					      ec->regmap,
> > +					      &regmap_config_noack);  
> 
> Ah— A custom regmap stacked on top of the old regmap… I think this
> deserves a comment.
> 
Yes, devm_regmap_init_i2c() sets a different set of callbacks depending
on circumstances. Seems to be the easiest way to avoid duplicating too
much code. I really hope that there are not so much devices requiring
such a dirty stuff that adding such thing to the generic regmap code
would be justified.

> > +		if (IS_ERR(ec->regmap))
> > +			return PTR_ERR(ec->regmap);
> >  		break;
> >  	default:
> >  		dev_err(ec->dev,
> > @@ -155,7 +199,6 @@ static int ntxec_probe(struct i2c_client *client)
> >  		 */
> >  		res = regmap_write(ec->regmap, NTXEC_REG_POWERKEEP,
> >  				   NTXEC_POWERKEEP_VALUE);
> > -		if (res < 0)
> >  			return res;  
> 
> This deletion looks like a mistake.
> 
Oops, sorry.

> >  
> >  		if (poweroff_restart_client)
> > @@ -181,8 +224,16 @@ static int ntxec_probe(struct i2c_client *client)
> >  
> >  	i2c_set_clientdata(client, ec);
> >  
> > -	res = devm_mfd_add_devices(ec->dev, PLATFORM_DEVID_NONE, ntxec_subdevices,
> > -				   ARRAY_SIZE(ntxec_subdevices), NULL, 0, NULL);
> > +	if (has_rtc)
> > +		res = devm_mfd_add_devices(ec->dev, PLATFORM_DEVID_NONE,
> > +					   ntxec_subdevices,
> > +					   ARRAY_SIZE(ntxec_subdevices),
> > +					   NULL, 0, NULL);
> > +	else
> > +		res = devm_mfd_add_devices(ec->dev, PLATFORM_DEVID_NONE,
> > +					   ntxec_subdev_pwm,
> > +					   ARRAY_SIZE(ntxec_subdev_pwm),
> > +					   NULL, 0, NULL);  
> 
> At some point, it will probably be simpler to have
> 
> 	struct mfd_cell *subdev = ntxec_subdevices;
> 	size_t subdev_size = ARRAY_SIZE(ntxec_subdevices);
> 
> on top of the probe function and override them in the switch statement,
> but at this point I think it doesn't matter, and either way is fine.
> 
Yes, that might be a good idea.

Regards,
Andreas

Re: [PATCH -next] mfd: ntxec: Support for EC in Tolino Shine 2 HD

[Jonathan Neuschäfer]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2250 bytes --]

On Sat, Mar 06, 2021 at 08:42:19PM +0100, Andreas Kemnade wrote:
> On Sat, 6 Mar 2021 20:14:46 +0100
> Jonathan Neuschäfer <j.neuschaefer@gmx.net> wrote:
[...]
> > > +/* some firmware versions do not ack written data, add a wrapper */
> > > +static const struct regmap_config regmap_config_noack = {
> > > +	.name = "ntxec_noack",
> > > +	.reg_bits = 8,
> > > +	.val_bits = 16,
> > > +	.cache_type = REGCACHE_NONE,
> > > +	.val_format_endian = REGMAP_ENDIAN_BIG,
> > > +	.reg_write = regmap_ignore_write,
> > > +	.reg_read = regmap_wrap_read  
> > 
> > Is the read wrapper necessary? It seems to me from reading regmap.h
> > that leaving .reg_read set to NULL should do the right thing, but I'm
> > not sure.
> >
> well if we want to read from it, there need to be some function for it.
> But if... I do not see anything worth to read besides of version.

Ok, with the understanding that there will be no read functionality
without the .reg_read callback, I'm fine leaving it in, even when the
particular drivers in existence don't use it.

> I think we can leave ouf val_format_endian because a lot of stuff is
> bypassed if no bus is set in regmap_init().
> There is e.g. a goto skip_format_initialization.

Dropping REGMAP_ENDIAN_BIG sounds reasonable, because this regmap
doesn't go to a byte-wise bus.


> > > +	case NTXEC_VERSION_TOLINO_SHINE2:
> > > +		has_rtc = false;
> > > +		ec->regmap = devm_regmap_init(ec->dev, NULL,
> > > +					      ec->regmap,
> > > +					      &regmap_config_noack);  
> > 
> > Ah— A custom regmap stacked on top of the old regmap… I think this
> > deserves a comment.
> > 
> Yes, devm_regmap_init_i2c() sets a different set of callbacks depending
> on circumstances. Seems to be the easiest way to avoid duplicating too
> much code. I really hope that there are not so much devices requiring
> such a dirty stuff that adding such thing to the generic regmap code
> would be justified.

Ok, please add a short comment here or extend the one above the repmap
config struct, to save interested readers a bit of trouble. I guess "add
a wrapper" goes in right direction, but it didn't make the stacking
obvious to me when I first read it.


Thanks,
Jonathan

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

Re: [PATCH -next] mfd: ntxec: Support for EC in Tolino Shine 2 HD

[Andreas Kemnade]

On Sat, 6 Mar 2021 21:19:38 +0100
Jonathan Neuschäfer <j.neuschaefer@gmx.net> wrote:

[...]
> > > > +	case NTXEC_VERSION_TOLINO_SHINE2:
> > > > +		has_rtc = false;
> > > > +		ec->regmap = devm_regmap_init(ec->dev, NULL,
> > > > +					      ec->regmap,
> > > > +					      &regmap_config_noack);    
> > > 
> > > Ah— A custom regmap stacked on top of the old regmap… I think this
> > > deserves a comment.
> > >   
> > Yes, devm_regmap_init_i2c() sets a different set of callbacks depending
> > on circumstances. Seems to be the easiest way to avoid duplicating too
> > much code. I really hope that there are not so much devices requiring
> > such a dirty stuff that adding such thing to the generic regmap code
> > would be justified.  
> 
> Ok, please add a short comment here or extend the one above the repmap
> config struct, to save interested readers a bit of trouble. I guess "add
> a wrapper" goes in right direction, but it didn't make the stacking
> obvious to me when I first read it.
>

I will wait for some days to see whether anybody chokes on that stack.

Regards,
Andreas