Hi Lukasz,
On 03/04/2015 07:38 PM, Lukasz Majewski wrote:
> Hi Chanwoo,
>
>> This patch adds the support for Exynos5433's TMU (Thermal Management
>> Unit). Exynos5433 has a little different register bit fields as
>> following description:
>> - Support the eight trip points for rising/falling interrupt by using
>> two registers
>> - Read the calibration type (1-point or 2-point) and sensor id from
>> TRIMINFO register
>> - Use a little different register address
>>
>> Cc: Zhang Rui <[email protected]>
>> Cc: Eduardo Valentin <[email protected]>
>> Signed-off-by: Chanwoo Choi <[email protected]>
>> ---
>> drivers/thermal/samsung/exynos_tmu.c | 161
>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
>> drivers/thermal/samsung/exynos_tmu.h | 1 + 2 files changed, 157
>> insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/thermal/samsung/exynos_tmu.c
>> b/drivers/thermal/samsung/exynos_tmu.c index 1d30b09..1bb2fb7 100644
>> --- a/drivers/thermal/samsung/exynos_tmu.c
>> +++ b/drivers/thermal/samsung/exynos_tmu.c
>> @@ -97,6 +97,32 @@
>> #define EXYNOS4412_MUX_ADDR_VALUE 6
>> #define EXYNOS4412_MUX_ADDR_SHIFT 20
>>
>> +/* Exynos5433 specific registers */
>> +#define EXYNOS5433_TMU_REG_CONTROL1 0x024
>> +#define EXYNOS5433_TMU_SAMPLING_INTERVAL 0x02c
>> +#define EXYNOS5433_TMU_COUNTER_VALUE0 0x030
>> +#define EXYNOS5433_TMU_COUNTER_VALUE1 0x034
>> +#define EXYNOS5433_TMU_REG_CURRENT_TEMP1 0x044
>> +#define EXYNOS5433_THD_TEMP_RISE3_0 0x050
>> +#define EXYNOS5433_THD_TEMP_RISE7_4 0x054
>> +#define EXYNOS5433_THD_TEMP_FALL3_0 0x060
>> +#define EXYNOS5433_THD_TEMP_FALL7_4 0x064
>> +#define EXYNOS5433_TMU_REG_INTEN 0x0c0
>> +#define EXYNOS5433_TMU_REG_INTPEND 0x0c8
>> +#define EXYNOS5433_TMU_EMUL_CON 0x110
>> +#define EXYNOS5433_TMU_PD_DET_EN 0x130
>> +
>> +#define EXYNOS5433_TRIMINFO_SENSOR_ID_SHIFT 16
>> +#define EXYNOS5433_TRIMINFO_CALIB_SEL_SHIFT 23
>> +#define EXYNOS5433_TRIMINFO_SENSOR_ID_MASK \
>> + (0xf << EXYNOS5433_TRIMINFO_SENSOR_ID_SHIFT)
>> +#define EXYNOS5433_TRIMINFO_CALIB_SEL_MASK BIT(23)
>> +
>> +#define EXYNOS5433_TRIMINFO_ONE_POINT_TRIMMING 0
>> +#define EXYNOS5433_TRIMINFO_TWO_POINT_TRIMMING 1
>> +
>> +#define EXYNOS5433_PD_DET_EN 1
>> +
>> /*exynos5440 specific registers*/
>> #define EXYNOS5440_TMU_S0_7_TRIM 0x000
>> #define EXYNOS5440_TMU_S0_7_CTRL 0x020
>> @@ -484,6 +510,101 @@ out:
>> return ret;
>> }
>>
>> +static int exynos5433_tmu_initialize(struct platform_device *pdev)
>> +{
>> + struct exynos_tmu_data *data = platform_get_drvdata(pdev);
>> + struct exynos_tmu_platform_data *pdata = data->pdata;
>> + struct thermal_zone_device *tz = data->tzd;
>> + unsigned int status, trim_info;
>> + unsigned int rising_threshold = 0, falling_threshold = 0;
>> + unsigned long temp, temp_hist;
>> + int ret = 0, threshold_code, i, sensor_id, cal_type;
>> +
>> + status = readb(data->base + EXYNOS_TMU_REG_STATUS);
>> + if (!status) {
>> + ret = -EBUSY;
>> + goto out;
>> + }
>> +
>> + trim_info = readl(data->base + EXYNOS_TMU_REG_TRIMINFO);
>> + sanitize_temp_error(data, trim_info);
>> +
>> + /* Read the temperature sensor id */
>> + sensor_id = (trim_info & EXYNOS5433_TRIMINFO_SENSOR_ID_MASK)
>> + >>
>> EXYNOS5433_TRIMINFO_SENSOR_ID_SHIFT;
>> + dev_info(&pdev->dev, "Temperature sensor ID: 0x%x\n",
>> sensor_id); +
>
> Isn't dev_info a bit too noisy? IMHO, dev_dbg would be enough
> here.
>
> Please consider this globally.
OK, I'll use dev_dbg.
>
>> + /* Read the calibration mode */
>> + writel(trim_info, data->base + EXYNOS_TMU_REG_TRIMINFO);
>> + cal_type = (trim_info & EXYNOS5433_TRIMINFO_CALIB_SEL_MASK)
>> + >>
>> EXYNOS5433_TRIMINFO_CALIB_SEL_SHIFT; +
>> + switch (cal_type) {
>> + case EXYNOS5433_TRIMINFO_ONE_POINT_TRIMMING:
>> + pdata->cal_type = TYPE_ONE_POINT_TRIMMING;
>> + break;
>> + case EXYNOS5433_TRIMINFO_TWO_POINT_TRIMMING:
>> + pdata->cal_type = TYPE_TWO_POINT_TRIMMING;
>> + break;
>> + default:
>> + pdata->cal_type = TYPE_ONE_POINT_TRIMMING;
>> + break;
>> + };
>> +
>> + dev_info(&pdev->dev, "Calibration type is %d-point
>> calibration\n",
>> + cal_type ? 2 : 1);
>> +
>> + /* Write temperature code for rising and falling threshold */
>> + for (i = 0; i < of_thermal_get_ntrips(tz); i++) {
>> + int rising_reg_offset, falling_reg_offset;
>> + int j = 0;
>> +
>> + switch (i) {
>> + case 0:
>> + case 1:
>> + case 2:
>> + case 3:
>> + rising_reg_offset =
>> EXYNOS5433_THD_TEMP_RISE3_0;
>> + falling_reg_offset =
>> EXYNOS5433_THD_TEMP_FALL3_0;
>> + j = i;
>> + break;
>> + case 4:
>> + case 5:
>> + case 6:
>> + case 7:
>> + rising_reg_offset =
>> EXYNOS5433_THD_TEMP_RISE7_4;
>> + falling_reg_offset =
>> EXYNOS5433_THD_TEMP_FALL7_4;
>> + j = i - 4;
>> + break;
>> + default:
>> + continue;
>> + }
>> +
>> + /* Write temperature code for rising threshold */
>> + tz->ops->get_trip_temp(tz, i, &temp);
>> + temp /= MCELSIUS;
>> + threshold_code = temp_to_code(data, temp);
>> +
>> + rising_threshold = readl(data->base +
>> rising_reg_offset);
>> + rising_threshold |= (threshold_code << j * 8);
>> + writel(rising_threshold, data->base +
>> rising_reg_offset); +
>> + /* Write temperature code for falling threshold */
>> + tz->ops->get_trip_hyst(tz, i, &temp_hist);
>> + temp_hist = temp - (temp_hist / MCELSIUS);
>> + threshold_code = temp_to_code(data, temp_hist);
>> +
>> + falling_threshold = readl(data->base +
>> falling_reg_offset);
>> + falling_threshold &= ~(0xff << j * 8);
>> + falling_threshold |= (threshold_code << j * 8);
>> + writel(falling_threshold, data->base +
>> falling_reg_offset);
>> + }
>> +
>> + data->tmu_clear_irqs(data);
>> +out:
>> + return ret;
>> +}
>> +
>> static int exynos5440_tmu_initialize(struct platform_device *pdev)
>> {
>> struct exynos_tmu_data *data = platform_get_drvdata(pdev);
>> @@ -682,7 +803,8 @@ static void exynos7_tmu_control(struct
>> platform_device *pdev, bool on)
>> if (on) {
>> con |= (1 << EXYNOS_TMU_CORE_EN_SHIFT);
>> - con |= (1 << EXYNOS7_PD_DET_EN_SHIFT);
>> + if (data->soc == SOC_ARCH_EXYNOS7)
>> + con |= (1 << EXYNOS7_PD_DET_EN_SHIFT);
>
> Isn't exynos7 implying that we already have SOC_ARCH_EXYNOS7?
> Why do we need this extra check?
On this patch, Exynos5433 TMU use the exynos7_tmu_control function.
But, as below your comment, I'll add the separate function for Exynos5433.
>
>> interrupt_en =
>> (of_thermal_is_trip_valid(tz, 7)
>> << EXYNOS7_TMU_INTEN_RISE7_SHIFT) |
>> @@ -705,11 +827,20 @@ static void exynos7_tmu_control(struct
>> platform_device *pdev, bool on) interrupt_en <<
>> EXYNOS_TMU_INTEN_FALL0_SHIFT; } else {
>> con &= ~(1 << EXYNOS_TMU_CORE_EN_SHIFT);
>> - con &= ~(1 << EXYNOS7_PD_DET_EN_SHIFT);
>> + if (data->soc == SOC_ARCH_EXYNOS7)
>> + con &= ~(1 << EXYNOS7_PD_DET_EN_SHIFT);
>> interrupt_en = 0; /* Disable all interrupts */
>> }
>>
>> - writel(interrupt_en, data->base + EXYNOS7_TMU_REG_INTEN);
>> + if (data->soc == SOC_ARCH_EXYNOS5433) {
>> + int pd_det_en = on ? EXYNOS5433_PD_DET_EN : 0;
>> +
>> + writel(pd_det_en, data->base +
>> EXYNOS5433_TMU_PD_DET_EN);
>> + writel(interrupt_en, data->base +
>> EXYNOS5433_TMU_REG_INTEN);
>> + } else {
>> + writel(interrupt_en, data->base +
>> EXYNOS7_TMU_REG_INTEN);
>> + }
>> +
>> writel(con, data->base + EXYNOS_TMU_REG_CONTROL);
>> }
>>
>> @@ -770,6 +901,8 @@ static void exynos4412_tmu_set_emulation(struct
>> exynos_tmu_data *data,
>> if (data->soc == SOC_ARCH_EXYNOS5260)
>> emul_con = EXYNOS5260_EMUL_CON;
>> + if (data->soc == SOC_ARCH_EXYNOS5433)
>> + emul_con = EXYNOS5433_TMU_EMUL_CON;
>> else if (data->soc == SOC_ARCH_EXYNOS7)
>> emul_con = EXYNOS7_TMU_REG_EMUL_CON;
>> else
>> @@ -882,6 +1015,9 @@ static void exynos4210_tmu_clear_irqs(struct
>> exynos_tmu_data *data) } else if (data->soc == SOC_ARCH_EXYNOS7) {
>> tmu_intstat = EXYNOS7_TMU_REG_INTPEND;
>> tmu_intclear = EXYNOS7_TMU_REG_INTPEND;
>> + } else if (data->soc == SOC_ARCH_EXYNOS5433) {
>> + tmu_intstat = EXYNOS5433_TMU_REG_INTPEND;
>> + tmu_intclear = EXYNOS5433_TMU_REG_INTPEND;
>> } else {
>> tmu_intstat = EXYNOS_TMU_REG_INTSTAT;
>> tmu_intclear = EXYNOS_TMU_REG_INTCLEAR;
>> @@ -926,6 +1062,7 @@ static const struct of_device_id
>> exynos_tmu_match[] = { { .compatible = "samsung,exynos5260-tmu", },
>> { .compatible = "samsung,exynos5420-tmu", },
>> { .compatible = "samsung,exynos5420-tmu-ext-triminfo", },
>> + { .compatible = "samsung,exynos5433-tmu", },
>> { .compatible = "samsung,exynos5440-tmu", },
>> { .compatible = "samsung,exynos7-tmu", },
>> { /* sentinel */ },
>> @@ -949,6 +1086,8 @@ static int exynos_of_get_soc_type(struct
>> device_node *np) else if (of_device_is_compatible(np,
>> "samsung,exynos5420-tmu-ext-triminfo"))
>> return SOC_ARCH_EXYNOS5420_TRIMINFO;
>> + else if (of_device_is_compatible(np,
>> "samsung,exynos5433-tmu"))
>> + return SOC_ARCH_EXYNOS5433;
>> else if (of_device_is_compatible(np,
>> "samsung,exynos5440-tmu")) return SOC_ARCH_EXYNOS5440;
>> else if (of_device_is_compatible(np, "samsung,exynos7-tmu"))
>> @@ -1069,6 +1208,13 @@ static int exynos_map_dt_data(struct
>> platform_device *pdev) data->tmu_set_emulation =
>> exynos4412_tmu_set_emulation; data->tmu_clear_irqs =
>> exynos4210_tmu_clear_irqs; break;
>> + case SOC_ARCH_EXYNOS5433:
>> + data->tmu_initialize = exynos5433_tmu_initialize;
>> + data->tmu_control = exynos7_tmu_control;
>
> I must frankly admit that I'm a bit confused.
>
> I'm curious why we didn't either define totally separate set of
> exynos5433_tmu_* functions or reusing existing exynos7_tmu_* ?
>
> Are exynos7 and exynos5433 so much different?
Exynos5444 TMU has a bit different register map from Exynos7 TMU.
To remove some confusion between Exynos7 and Exnynos5433,
I'll add seprate function for Exynos5433 TMU.
[snip]
Thanks,
Chanwoo Choi
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
