From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail.manjaro.org (mail.manjaro.org [116.203.91.91]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 924D9433CE; Sun, 26 Jan 2025 06:10:32 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=116.203.91.91 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1737871834; cv=none; b=K0KH/ZWNNagqcDQVB0PFaIsf/hvvDWpokB8ywTr+hCZ0m5pJXe609tmgl43IM6eARI2W5d8ZzatRa15NgZJ2EK5o0kKi0vyyihTpIXFxCBNDS6dRtE8liz08cB5NEdAurVDX7nNYbKlPFrNjlQsJV5h7xQMRS8U2N/NOuEUUwMU= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1737871834; c=relaxed/simple; bh=Dg9hTwzDKC3lcngdjYoy+m6pN3yMd5ZfDcbRo9fdDpo=; h=MIME-Version:Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References: Message-ID:Content-Type; b=IOFH5BeS8QjHUKyjppERksOxBVBcwZFEckFbWoz/hXLG1bj8sOk0/cD3/7wJeqPz4/ld7aY0YYCw9w21ohR6/lRv/Zur4g20fZKJ9GWiW0yl9b2QwMWXDQANJXaOqMkGwYlNoE8N9QZpfK38rc6HX1FMg9BCN+aiJuTUCfBYosQ= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=manjaro.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=manjaro.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=manjaro.org header.i=@manjaro.org header.b=BoSYA+YN; arc=none smtp.client-ip=116.203.91.91 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=manjaro.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=manjaro.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=manjaro.org header.i=@manjaro.org header.b="BoSYA+YN" Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=manjaro.org; s=2021; t=1737871830; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=cElRMI26kDUSrPRrVyetsiiM/S0G4rSifs7vMEkuMyM=; b=BoSYA+YN8DT70FM/64U/Q+bBiO35QdHpf2DFaywph2W9xYyJWIts4K5wjUescUkk4usIm+ TOoQzB/ftyB+qevWHicX1H8OmXRYYzI07gN7AnqLaUEgv4NMEddRPpZVyyN9VrYTmMKHwa 30eFNwTpDdQCdKVlrG1lYKTVK54ryoEYagkqUqSXt/cU4sstvuzubBlEoOAaMb9REkr2eS BuwYrO57pnyBqlRdBwbJBTe1q8cnsXZ8RQAOOAUxAtMjDzBHLIvmKSRSTtvQ/N7E5um9pW Wd1OReYHbtLte7RXrw/IsWieNfQ9CT6mS0oaOO80UqYK+lwWulf2NuyxTxdY2g== Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2025 07:10:30 +0100 From: Dragan Simic To: Alexey Charkov Cc: Alexander Shiyan , Rob Herring , Conor Dooley , Heiko Stuebner , devicetree@vger.kernel.org, Sebastian Reichel , stable@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org, Krzysztof Kozlowski , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: dts: rockchip: Fix broken tsadc pinctrl binding for rk3588 In-Reply-To: References: <20250124052611.3705-1-eagle.alexander923@gmail.com> <61b494b209d7360d0f36adbf6d5443a4@manjaro.org> Message-ID: <5bfe48fd72e2a82f5b2d8b00d8a79d35@manjaro.org> X-Sender: dsimic@manjaro.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Authentication-Results: ORIGINATING; auth=pass smtp.auth=dsimic@manjaro.org smtp.mailfrom=dsimic@manjaro.org On 2025-01-24 20:44, Alexey Charkov wrote: > On Fri, Jan 24, 2025 at 9:23 PM Alexey Charkov > wrote: >> On Fri, Jan 24, 2025 at 2:37 PM Dragan Simic >> wrote: >> > On 2025-01-24 11:25, Alexey Charkov wrote: >> > > On Fri, Jan 24, 2025 at 2:06 PM Dragan Simic >> > > wrote: >> > >> On 2025-01-24 09:33, Alexey Charkov wrote: >> > >> > On Fri, Jan 24, 2025 at 9:26 AM Alexander Shiyan >> > >> > wrote: >> > >> >> >> > >> >> There is no pinctrl "gpio" and "otpout" (probably designed as >> > >> >> "output") >> > >> >> handling in the tsadc driver. >> > >> >> Let's use proper binding "default" and "sleep". >> > >> > >> > >> > This looks reasonable, however I've tried it on my Radxa Rock 5C and >> > >> > the driver still doesn't claim GPIO0 RK_PA1 even with this change. As >> > >> > a result, a simulated thermal runaway condition (I've changed the >> > >> > tshut temperature to 65000 and tshut mode to 1) doesn't trigger a PMIC >> > >> > reset, even though a direct `gpioset 0 1=0` does. >> > >> > >> > >> > Are any additional changes needed to the driver itself? >> > >> >> > >> I've been digging through this patch the whole TSADC/OTP thing in the >> > >> last couple of hours, and AFAIK some parts of the upstream driver are >> > >> still missing, in comparison with the downstream driver. >> > >> >> > >> I've got some small suggestions for the patch itself, but the issue >> > >> you observed is obviously of higher priority, and I've singled it out >> > >> as well while digging through the code. >> > >> >> > >> Could you, please, try the patch below quickly, to see is it going to >> > >> fix the issue you observed? I've got some "IRL stuff" to take care of >> > >> today, so I can't test it myself, and it would be great to know is it >> > >> the right path to the proper fix. >> > >> >> > >> diff --git i/drivers/thermal/rockchip_thermal.c >> > >> w/drivers/thermal/rockchip_thermal.c >> > >> index f551df48eef9..62f0e14a8d98 100644 >> > >> --- i/drivers/thermal/rockchip_thermal.c >> > >> +++ w/drivers/thermal/rockchip_thermal.c >> > >> @@ -1568,6 +1568,11 @@ static int rockchip_thermal_probe(struct >> > >> platform_device *pdev) >> > >> thermal->chip->initialize(thermal->grf, thermal->regs, >> > >> thermal->tshut_polarity); >> > >> >> > >> + if (thermal->tshut_mode == TSHUT_MODE_GPIO) >> > >> + pinctrl_select_default_state(dev); >> > >> + else >> > >> + pinctrl_select_sleep_state(dev); >> > > >> > > I believe no 'else' block is needed here, because if tshut_mode is not >> > > TSHUT_MODE_GPIO then the TSADC doesn't use this pin at all, so there's >> > > no reason for the driver to mess with its pinctrl state. I'd rather >> > > put a mirroring block to put the pin back to its 'sleep' state in the >> > > removal function for the TSHUT_MODE_GPIO case. >> > >> > You're right, but the "else block" is what the downstream driver does, >> >> Does it though? It only handles the TSHUT_MODE_GPIO case as far as I >> can tell (or TSHUT_MODE_OTP in downstream driver lingo) [1] >> >> [1] >> https://github.com/radxa/kernel/blob/edb3eeeaa4643ecac6f4185d6d391c574735fca1/drivers/thermal/rockchip_thermal.c#L2564 >> >> > so I think it's better to simply stay on the safe side and follow that >> > logic in the upstream driver. Is it really needed? Perhaps not, but >> > it also shouldn't hurt. >> > >> > > Will try and revert. >> > >> > Awesome, thanks! >> > >> > > P.S. Just looked at the downstream driver, and it actually calls >> > > TSHUT_MODE_GPIO TSHUT_MODE_OTP instead, so it seems that "otpout" was >> > > not a typo in the first place. So maybe the right approach here is not >> > > to change the device tree but rather fix the "gpio" / "otpout" pinctrl >> > > state handling in the driver. >> > >> > Indeed, "otpout" wasn't a typo, and I've already addressed that in my >> > comments to Alexander's patch. Will send that response a bit later. >> > >> > I think it's actually better to accept the approach in Alexander's >> > patch, because the whole thing applies to other Rockchip SoCs as well, >> > not just to the RK3588(S). >> >> Anyway, I've just tried it after including the changes below, and >> while /sys/kernel/debug/pinctrl/pinctrl-handles shows the expected >> pinctrls under tsadc, the driver still doesn't seem to be triggering a >> PMIC reset. Weird. Any thoughts welcome. > > I found the culprit. "otpout" (or "default" if we follow Alexander's > suggested approach) pinctrl state should refer to the &tsadc_shut_org > config instead of &tsadc_shut - then the PMIC reset works. Huh, thanks for debugging, but this is quite confusing. Let me dig through everything again later today.