Re: [PATCH] RTC: RK808: Work around hardware bug on November 31st

[Chris Zhong <zyw@rock-chips.com>]

On 12/07/2015 10:52 AM, Doug Anderson wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Sun, Dec 6, 2015 at 6:50 PM, Doug Anderson <dianders@chromium.org> wrote:
>> Chris,
>>
>> On Sun, Dec 6, 2015 at 5:33 PM, Chris Zhong <zyw@rock-chips.com> wrote:
>>> Hi Doug
>>>
>>> RK808 has a shadowed register for saving a "frozen" RTC time.
>>> When we setting "GET_TIME" to 1, the time will save in this shadowed
>>> register. So if we do not set the "GET_TIME", we always get the last time.
>>>
>>> read the old time before "get_time", and then read the time again for new
>>> time. If the old time earlier than 12.1 && new time later than 12.1, we
>>> should
>>> +1 day for the correct rtc time.
>>>
>>> On the other hand, we should set the "GET_TIME" after rk808_rtc_set_time,
>>> for restore the time before suspend/shut_down.
>> Ah, good idea using the shadow registers.  The whole point of the
>> shadow registers is to enable atomic read of time, right?  So if the
>> clock ticks as you are reading 23:59:59 you don't end up reading
>> 23:59:00 or 24:59:59 (you'll get either 23:59:59 or 24:00:00).  So
>> right, time read will now be:
>>
>> 1. Read GET_TIME.  Confirm it's 1.
>> 2. Read the time.
>> 3. Set GET_TIME to 0.
>> 4. Set GET_TIME to 1.
>> 5. Read the time.
>>
>> If time from #2 < 11/31 and time from #5 >= 11/31 then we do the
>> adjust.  If GET_TIME wasn't 1 in step #1 then we won't do any
>> adjusting unless the time is actually 11/31.
>>
>> Between steps #4 and #5 we'll need to add a small delay since old code
>> used to use the setting to 0 as a delay (as commented).
>>
>> We should presumably always leave GET_TIME as 1 unless we're actively
>> reading the time for the most reliability.  Also, if we've already
>> read the time this bootup, we can certainly optimize the above by
>> skipping #1 and #2.
GET_TIME: Rising transition of this register transfers dynamic registers 
into
static shadowed registers.
So only the rising of GET_TIME would update the "static shadowed registers".
We only need ensure that the rising occurs on condition that we want to the
really time.
> Oh, but also we still need to know whether to adjust the alarm.  I
> think you said that all existing rk808 chips have this bug and that
> you'll set a bit (to be determined later) if/when this bug is fixed.
> So we still need to assume that all rk808 chips have this bug...
I think so, all rk808 chips have this bug. And we can read the version 
register
to differentiate the PMICs, once this bug is fixed.
>
> -Doug
>
>
>