Re: [PATCH v1 1/1] usb: typec: tipd: Restore generic TPS6598x contract interrupts

Sebastian Krzyszkowiak
2026-04-03T10:31:16Z

On czwartek, 2 kwietnia 2026 02:09:50 czas środkowoeuropejski letni Vincent
Cloutier wrote:
> From: Vincent Cloutier <vincent@cloutier.co>
>
> The generic TPS6598x interrupt handler still relies on
> PP_SWITCH_CHANGED, NEW_CONTRACT_AS_CONSUMER, HARD_RESET, and
> STATUS_UPDATE, but the irq_mask1 refactor only kept
> POWER_STATUS_UPDATE, DATA_STATUS_UPDATE, and PLUG_EVENT in
> tps6598x_data.
>
> On the librem5 that leaves PD partners stuck at the 500 mA fallback
> because the active contract is never refreshed after attach.
>
> Restore the missing interrupt bits so the existing handler paths are
> reachable again. This fixes USB-C charging negotiation on the librem5:
> after a replug the TPS6598x source power supply reports 3 A instead of
> 500 mA and the BQ25890 input limit follows suit.
>
> Fixes: b3dddff502c5 ("usb: typec: tipd: Move initial irq mask to tipd_data")
> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
> Signed-off-by: Vincent Cloutier <vincent@cloutier.co>
> ---
> drivers/usb/typec/tipd/core.c | 6 +++++-
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/usb/typec/tipd/core.c b/drivers/usb/typec/tipd/core.c
> index 84ee5687bb27..83f2fec6e34e 100644
> --- a/drivers/usb/typec/tipd/core.c
> +++ b/drivers/usb/typec/tipd/core.c
> @@ -2395,7 +2395,11 @@ static const struct tipd_data tps6598x_data = {
> .irq_handler = tps6598x_interrupt,
> .irq_mask1 = TPS_REG_INT_POWER_STATUS_UPDATE |
> TPS_REG_INT_DATA_STATUS_UPDATE |
> - TPS_REG_INT_PLUG_EVENT,
> + TPS_REG_INT_PLUG_EVENT |
> + TPS_REG_INT_PP_SWITCH_CHANGED |
> + TPS_REG_INT_NEW_CONTRACT_AS_CONSUMER |
> + TPS_REG_INT_HARD_RESET |
> + TPS_REG_INT_STATUS_UPDATE,
> .tps_struct_size = sizeof(struct tps6598x),
> .register_port = tps6598x_register_port,
> .unregister_port = tps6598x_unregister_port,

This driver has never handled these interrupts (as seen in the commit you
referenced), so these should be added in patches that make it handle them.

You likely got confused by the patches that still stay in the downstream
Librem 5 tree. We should get them cleaned up and mainlined, but until that
happens this patch doesn't make much sense here I'm afraid.

S.