| Message ID | 20210526162342.GA20@8bbba9ba63a4 (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | regulator: fan53555: add back tcs4526 | expand |
On Wed, May 26, 2021 at 12:23 PM Rudi Heitbaum <rudi@heitbaum.com> wrote: > > > For rk3399pro boards the tcs4526 regulator supports the vdd_gpu > regulator. The tcs4526 regulator has a chip id of <0>. > Add the compatibile tcs,tcs4526 > > without this patch, the dmesg output is: > fan53555-regulator 0-0010: Chip ID 0 not supported! > fan53555-regulator 0-0010: Failed to setup device! > fan53555-regulator: probe of 0-0010 failed with error -22 > with this patch, the dmesg output is: > vdd_gpu: supplied by vcc5v0_sys > > The regulators are described as: > - Dedicated power management IC TCS4525 > - Lithium battery protection chip TCS4526 > > This has been tested with a Radxa Rock Pi N10. > > Fixes: f9028dcdf589 ("regulator: fan53555: only bind tcs4525 to correct chip id") > Signed-off-by: Rudi Heitbaum <rudi@heitbaum.com> Considering the TCS4525 wasn't supported prior to its recent addition, and the TCS4526 wasn't supported by the driver at all, this isn't a fix but a feature addition. Binding only to the correct device ID exists for this reason, to prevent unsafe voltage setting. I also don't see the TCS4525/TCS4526 regulators in the current linux-next device tree for the N10. > --- > drivers/regulator/fan53555.c | 8 ++++++++ > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/drivers/regulator/fan53555.c b/drivers/regulator/fan53555.c > index 2695be617373..ddab9359ea20 100644 > --- a/drivers/regulator/fan53555.c > +++ b/drivers/regulator/fan53555.c > @@ -90,6 +90,7 @@ enum { > }; > > enum { > + TCS4525_CHIP_ID_00 = 0, > TCS4525_CHIP_ID_12 = 12, This isn't a TCS4525, but a TCS4526. > }; > > @@ -373,6 +374,7 @@ static int fan53555_voltages_setup_silergy(struct fan53555_device_info *di) > static int fan53526_voltages_setup_tcs(struct fan53555_device_info *di) > { > switch (di->chip_id) { > + case TCS4525_CHIP_ID_00: > case TCS4525_CHIP_ID_12: > di->slew_reg = TCS4525_TIME; > di->slew_mask = TCS_SLEW_MASK; > @@ -564,6 +566,9 @@ static const struct of_device_id __maybe_unused fan53555_dt_ids[] = { > }, { > .compatible = "tcs,tcs4525", > .data = (void *)FAN53526_VENDOR_TCS > + }, { > + .compatible = "tcs,tcs4526", > + .data = (void *)FAN53526_VENDOR_TCS Since you aren't adding any functional code, is there a particular reason you can't just add the chip id and simply use the tcs4525 compatible? This will prevent you from needing to modify the dt-bindings as well. > }, > { } > }; > @@ -672,6 +677,9 @@ static const struct i2c_device_id fan53555_id[] = { > }, { > .name = "tcs4525", > .driver_data = FAN53526_VENDOR_TCS > + }, { > + .name = "tcs4526", > + .driver_data = FAN53526_VENDOR_TCS > }, > { }, > }; > -- > 2.29.2 >
On Wed, May 26, 2021 at 02:41:00PM -0400, Peter Geis wrote: > On Wed, May 26, 2021 at 12:23 PM Rudi Heitbaum <rudi@heitbaum.com> wrote: > > > > > > For rk3399pro boards the tcs4526 regulator supports the vdd_gpu > > regulator. The tcs4526 regulator has a chip id of <0>. > > Add the compatibile tcs,tcs4526 > > > > without this patch, the dmesg output is: > > fan53555-regulator 0-0010: Chip ID 0 not supported! > > fan53555-regulator 0-0010: Failed to setup device! > > fan53555-regulator: probe of 0-0010 failed with error -22 > > with this patch, the dmesg output is: > > vdd_gpu: supplied by vcc5v0_sys > > > > The regulators are described as: > > - Dedicated power management IC TCS4525 > > - Lithium battery protection chip TCS4526 > > > > This has been tested with a Radxa Rock Pi N10. > > > > Fixes: f9028dcdf589 ("regulator: fan53555: only bind tcs4525 to correct chip id") > > Signed-off-by: Rudi Heitbaum <rudi@heitbaum.com> > > Considering the TCS4525 wasn't supported prior to its recent addition, > and the TCS4526 wasn't supported by the driver at all, this isn't a > fix but a feature addition. > Binding only to the correct device ID exists for this reason, to > prevent unsafe voltage setting. Hi Peter, thanks for the detailed feedback. You are quite right (I had started using the tcs4525 patch as a tcs452x patch. I'll update that in the resubmission. > I also don't see the TCS4525/TCS4526 regulators in the current > linux-next device tree for the N10. I have a working rk3399pro-vmarc-som.dtsi that I intend to submit, but wanted to get clarity on the tcs452x first. I have included it at the bottom of this email. > > --- > > drivers/regulator/fan53555.c | 8 ++++++++ > > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/regulator/fan53555.c b/drivers/regulator/fan53555.c > > index 2695be617373..ddab9359ea20 100644 > > --- a/drivers/regulator/fan53555.c > > +++ b/drivers/regulator/fan53555.c > > @@ -90,6 +90,7 @@ enum { > > }; > > > > enum { > > + TCS4525_CHIP_ID_00 = 0, > > TCS4525_CHIP_ID_12 = 12, > > This isn't a TCS4525, but a TCS4526. I'll update this to TCS4526_CHIP_ID_00 > > }; > > > > @@ -373,6 +374,7 @@ static int fan53555_voltages_setup_silergy(struct fan53555_device_info *di) > > static int fan53526_voltages_setup_tcs(struct fan53555_device_info *di) > > { > > switch (di->chip_id) { > > + case TCS4525_CHIP_ID_00: > > case TCS4525_CHIP_ID_12: > > di->slew_reg = TCS4525_TIME; > > di->slew_mask = TCS_SLEW_MASK; > > @@ -564,6 +566,9 @@ static const struct of_device_id __maybe_unused fan53555_dt_ids[] = { > > }, { > > .compatible = "tcs,tcs4525", > > .data = (void *)FAN53526_VENDOR_TCS > > + }, { > > + .compatible = "tcs,tcs4526", > > + .data = (void *)FAN53526_VENDOR_TCS > > Since you aren't adding any functional code, is there a particular > reason you can't just add the chip id and simply use the tcs4525 > compatible? > This will prevent you from needing to modify the dt-bindings as well. In and earlier commit to the BSP kernel the proposal was to rename to tcs452x. ref: https://github.com/CK-LINUX/kernel/commit/b3bbe8018c56362feed1e49c8d243a8dbcdcc07b I chose to follow the example of silergy,syr827 and silergy,syr828 for tcs4526 (given I made the mistake in assuming that support for tcs4525 meant support for tcs4525.) This would maintain consistency of naming of tcs4526 throughout the source. Is that ok? > > }, > > { } > > }; > > @@ -672,6 +677,9 @@ static const struct i2c_device_id fan53555_id[] = { > > }, { > > .name = "tcs4525", > > .driver_data = FAN53526_VENDOR_TCS > > + }, { > > + .name = "tcs4526", > > + .driver_data = FAN53526_VENDOR_TCS > > }, > > { }, > > }; > > -- > > 2.29.2 > > Below is the draft patch for the dtsi includeing the 2 missing regulators and to enable the GPU on the Radxa Rock Pi N10 which utilises the VMARC RK3399Pro SoM. This will be submitted seperately to the "tcs4526 regulator" patch. --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399pro-vmarc-som.dtsi 2021-05-08 09:11:59.000000000 +0000 +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399pro-vmarc-som.dtsi 2021-05-08 09:11:59.000000000 +0000 @@ -57,6 +57,22 @@ pinctrl-0 = <&hdmi_cec>; }; +&hdmi_sound { + status = "okay"; +}; + +&gpu { + mali-supply = <&vdd_gpu>; + assigned-clocks = <&cru ACLK_GPU>; + assigned-clock-rates = <200000000>; + status = "okay"; + /delete-property/ operating-points-v2; +}; + +&vopl { + status = "disabled"; +}; + &i2c0 { clock-frequency = <400000>; i2c-scl-falling-time-ns = <30>; @@ -289,6 +288,50 @@ }; }; }; + + vdd_cpu_b: tcs4525@1c { + compatible = "tcs,tcs4525"; + reg = <0x1c>; + vin-supply = <&vcc5v0_sys>; + regulator-compatible = "fan53555-reg"; + pinctrl-0 = <&vsel1_gpio>; + vsel-gpios = <&gpio1 RK_PC1 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>; + regulator-name = "vdd_cpu_b"; + regulator-min-microvolt = <712500>; + regulator-max-microvolt = <1500000>; + regulator-ramp-delay = <2300>; + fcs,suspend-voltage-selector = <1>; + regulator-always-on; + regulator-boot-on; + regulator-initial-state = <3>; + regulator-state-mem { + regulator-off-in-suspend; + }; + }; + + vdd_gpu: tcs4526@10 { + compatible = "tcs,tcs4526"; + reg = <0x10>; + vin-supply = <&vcc5v0_sys>; + regulator-compatible = "fan53555-reg"; + pinctrl-0 = <&vsel2_gpio>; + vsel-gpios = <&gpio1 RK_PB6 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>; + regulator-name = "vdd_gpu"; + regulator-min-microvolt = <735000>; + regulator-max-microvolt = <1400000>; + regulator-ramp-delay = <1000>; + fcs,suspend-voltage-selector = <1>; + regulator-always-on; + regulator-boot-on; + regulator-initial-state = <3>; + regulator-state-mem { + regulator-off-in-suspend; + }; + }; }; + +&i2s2 { + status = "okay"; +}; &i2c1 { @@ -381,6 +380,29 @@ pmic_int_l: pmic-int-l { rockchip,pins = <1 RK_PC2 0 &pcfg_pull_up>; }; + vsel1_gpio: vsel1-gpio { + rockchip,pins = + <1 RK_PC1 0 &pcfg_pull_down>; + }; + vsel2_gpio: vsel2-gpio { + rockchip,pins = + <1 RK_PB6 0 &pcfg_pull_down>; + }; + + soc_slppin_gpio: soc-slppin-gpio { + rockchip,pins = + <1 RK_PA5 0 &pcfg_output_low>; + }; + + soc_slppin_slp: soc-slppin-slp { + rockchip,pins = + <1 RK_PA5 1 &pcfg_pull_down>; + }; + + soc_slppin_rst: soc-slppin-rst { + rockchip,pins = + <1 RK_PA5 2 &pcfg_pull_none>; + }; }; sdio-pwrseq {
On Thu, May 27, 2021 at 6:59 AM Rudi Heitbaum <rudi@heitbaum.com> wrote: > > On Wed, May 26, 2021 at 02:41:00PM -0400, Peter Geis wrote: > > On Wed, May 26, 2021 at 12:23 PM Rudi Heitbaum <rudi@heitbaum.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > For rk3399pro boards the tcs4526 regulator supports the vdd_gpu > > > regulator. The tcs4526 regulator has a chip id of <0>. > > > Add the compatibile tcs,tcs4526 > > > > > > without this patch, the dmesg output is: > > > fan53555-regulator 0-0010: Chip ID 0 not supported! > > > fan53555-regulator 0-0010: Failed to setup device! > > > fan53555-regulator: probe of 0-0010 failed with error -22 > > > with this patch, the dmesg output is: > > > vdd_gpu: supplied by vcc5v0_sys > > > > > > The regulators are described as: > > > - Dedicated power management IC TCS4525 > > > - Lithium battery protection chip TCS4526 > > > > > > This has been tested with a Radxa Rock Pi N10. > > > > > > Fixes: f9028dcdf589 ("regulator: fan53555: only bind tcs4525 to correct chip id") > > > Signed-off-by: Rudi Heitbaum <rudi@heitbaum.com> > > > > Considering the TCS4525 wasn't supported prior to its recent addition, > > and the TCS4526 wasn't supported by the driver at all, this isn't a > > fix but a feature addition. > > Binding only to the correct device ID exists for this reason, to > > prevent unsafe voltage setting. > > Hi Peter, thanks for the detailed feedback. You are quite right (I had > started using the tcs4525 patch as a tcs452x patch. I'll update that in > the resubmission. > > > I also don't see the TCS4525/TCS4526 regulators in the current > > linux-next device tree for the N10. > > I have a working rk3399pro-vmarc-som.dtsi that I intend to submit, but > wanted to get clarity on the tcs452x first. I have included it at the > bottom of this email. > > > > --- > > > drivers/regulator/fan53555.c | 8 ++++++++ > > > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+) > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/regulator/fan53555.c b/drivers/regulator/fan53555.c > > > index 2695be617373..ddab9359ea20 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/regulator/fan53555.c > > > +++ b/drivers/regulator/fan53555.c > > > @@ -90,6 +90,7 @@ enum { > > > }; > > > > > > enum { > > > + TCS4525_CHIP_ID_00 = 0, > > > TCS4525_CHIP_ID_12 = 12, > > > > This isn't a TCS4525, but a TCS4526. > > I'll update this to TCS4526_CHIP_ID_00 > > > > }; > > > > > > @@ -373,6 +374,7 @@ static int fan53555_voltages_setup_silergy(struct fan53555_device_info *di) > > > static int fan53526_voltages_setup_tcs(struct fan53555_device_info *di) > > > { > > > switch (di->chip_id) { > > > + case TCS4525_CHIP_ID_00: > > > case TCS4525_CHIP_ID_12: > > > di->slew_reg = TCS4525_TIME; > > > di->slew_mask = TCS_SLEW_MASK; > > > @@ -564,6 +566,9 @@ static const struct of_device_id __maybe_unused fan53555_dt_ids[] = { > > > }, { > > > .compatible = "tcs,tcs4525", > > > .data = (void *)FAN53526_VENDOR_TCS > > > + }, { > > > + .compatible = "tcs,tcs4526", > > > + .data = (void *)FAN53526_VENDOR_TCS > > > > Since you aren't adding any functional code, is there a particular > > reason you can't just add the chip id and simply use the tcs4525 > > compatible? > > This will prevent you from needing to modify the dt-bindings as well. > > In and earlier commit to the BSP kernel the proposal was to rename to > tcs452x. ref: > https://github.com/CK-LINUX/kernel/commit/b3bbe8018c56362feed1e49c8d243a8dbcdcc07b > > I chose to follow the example of silergy,syr827 and silergy,syr828 for > tcs4526 (given I made the mistake in assuming that support for tcs4525 > meant support for tcs4525.) This would maintain consistency of naming of > tcs4526 throughout the source. Is that ok? It's fine to have both compatibles (and avoids confusion in device-trees), just remember to update the dt-bindings as well. It's funny to see drivers with both schemes, so we really have to decide which path we want to go down. Considering the syr827/syr828 as convention, we should probably just go down that route for consistency within the driver. > > > > }, > > > { } > > > }; > > > @@ -672,6 +677,9 @@ static const struct i2c_device_id fan53555_id[] = { > > > }, { > > > .name = "tcs4525", > > > .driver_data = FAN53526_VENDOR_TCS > > > + }, { > > > + .name = "tcs4526", > > > + .driver_data = FAN53526_VENDOR_TCS > > > }, > > > { }, > > > }; > > > -- > > > 2.29.2 > > > > > Below is the draft patch for the dtsi includeing the 2 missing regulators and > to enable the GPU on the Radxa Rock Pi N10 which utilises the VMARC RK3399Pro SoM. > > This will be submitted seperately to the "tcs4526 regulator" patch. > > --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399pro-vmarc-som.dtsi 2021-05-08 09:11:59.000000000 +0000 > +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399pro-vmarc-som.dtsi 2021-05-08 09:11:59.000000000 +0000 > @@ -57,6 +57,22 @@ > pinctrl-0 = <&hdmi_cec>; > }; > > +&hdmi_sound { > + status = "okay"; > +}; > + > +&gpu { > + mali-supply = <&vdd_gpu>; > + assigned-clocks = <&cru ACLK_GPU>; > + assigned-clock-rates = <200000000>; > + status = "okay"; > + /delete-property/ operating-points-v2; Removal of the operating points kind of makes the gpu regulator moot, don't you think? > +}; > + > +&vopl { > + status = "disabled"; > +}; > + > &i2c0 { > clock-frequency = <400000>; > i2c-scl-falling-time-ns = <30>; > @@ -289,6 +288,50 @@ > }; > }; > }; > + > + vdd_cpu_b: tcs4525@1c { > + compatible = "tcs,tcs4525"; > + reg = <0x1c>; > + vin-supply = <&vcc5v0_sys>; > + regulator-compatible = "fan53555-reg"; > + pinctrl-0 = <&vsel1_gpio>; > + vsel-gpios = <&gpio1 RK_PC1 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>; > + regulator-name = "vdd_cpu_b"; > + regulator-min-microvolt = <712500>; > + regulator-max-microvolt = <1500000>; > + regulator-ramp-delay = <2300>; > + fcs,suspend-voltage-selector = <1>; > + regulator-always-on; > + regulator-boot-on; > + regulator-initial-state = <3>; > + regulator-state-mem { > + regulator-off-in-suspend; > + }; > + }; > + > + vdd_gpu: tcs4526@10 { > + compatible = "tcs,tcs4526"; > + reg = <0x10>; > + vin-supply = <&vcc5v0_sys>; > + regulator-compatible = "fan53555-reg"; > + pinctrl-0 = <&vsel2_gpio>; > + vsel-gpios = <&gpio1 RK_PB6 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>; > + regulator-name = "vdd_gpu"; > + regulator-min-microvolt = <735000>; > + regulator-max-microvolt = <1400000>; > + regulator-ramp-delay = <1000>; > + fcs,suspend-voltage-selector = <1>; > + regulator-always-on; > + regulator-boot-on; > + regulator-initial-state = <3>; > + regulator-state-mem { > + regulator-off-in-suspend; > + }; > + }; > }; > + > +&i2s2 { > + status = "okay"; > +}; > > &i2c1 { > @@ -381,6 +380,29 @@ > pmic_int_l: pmic-int-l { > rockchip,pins = <1 RK_PC2 0 &pcfg_pull_up>; > }; > + vsel1_gpio: vsel1-gpio { > + rockchip,pins = > + <1 RK_PC1 0 &pcfg_pull_down>; > + }; > + vsel2_gpio: vsel2-gpio { > + rockchip,pins = > + <1 RK_PB6 0 &pcfg_pull_down>; > + }; > + > + soc_slppin_gpio: soc-slppin-gpio { > + rockchip,pins = > + <1 RK_PA5 0 &pcfg_output_low>; > + }; > + > + soc_slppin_slp: soc-slppin-slp { > + rockchip,pins = > + <1 RK_PA5 1 &pcfg_pull_down>; > + }; > + > + soc_slppin_rst: soc-slppin-rst { > + rockchip,pins = > + <1 RK_PA5 2 &pcfg_pull_none>; > + }; > }; > > sdio-pwrseq {
Hi Rudi, Thanks for the patch. On Thu, 2021-05-27 at 10:59 +0000, Rudi Heitbaum wrote: > On Wed, May 26, 2021 at 02:41:00PM -0400, Peter Geis wrote: > > On Wed, May 26, 2021 at 12:23 PM Rudi Heitbaum <rudi@heitbaum.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > For rk3399pro boards the tcs4526 regulator supports the vdd_gpu > > > regulator. The tcs4526 regulator has a chip id of <0>. > > > Add the compatibile tcs,tcs4526 > > > > > > without this patch, the dmesg output is: > > > fan53555-regulator 0-0010: Chip ID 0 not supported! > > > fan53555-regulator 0-0010: Failed to setup device! > > > fan53555-regulator: probe of 0-0010 failed with error -22 > > > with this patch, the dmesg output is: > > > vdd_gpu: supplied by vcc5v0_sys > > > > > > The regulators are described as: > > > - Dedicated power management IC TCS4525 > > > - Lithium battery protection chip TCS4526 > > > > > > This has been tested with a Radxa Rock Pi N10. > > > > > > Fixes: f9028dcdf589 ("regulator: fan53555: only bind tcs4525 to correct chip id") > > > Signed-off-by: Rudi Heitbaum <rudi@heitbaum.com> > > > > Considering the TCS4525 wasn't supported prior to its recent addition, > > and the TCS4526 wasn't supported by the driver at all, this isn't a > > fix but a feature addition. > > Binding only to the correct device ID exists for this reason, to > > prevent unsafe voltage setting. > > Hi Peter, thanks for the detailed feedback. You are quite right (I had > started using the tcs4525 patch as a tcs452x patch. I'll update that in > the resubmission. > > > I also don't see the TCS4525/TCS4526 regulators in the current > > linux-next device tree for the N10. > > I have a working rk3399pro-vmarc-som.dtsi that I intend to submit, but > wanted to get clarity on the tcs452x first. I have included it at the > bottom of this email. > > > > --- > > > drivers/regulator/fan53555.c | 8 ++++++++ > > > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+) > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/regulator/fan53555.c b/drivers/regulator/fan53555.c > > > index 2695be617373..ddab9359ea20 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/regulator/fan53555.c > > > +++ b/drivers/regulator/fan53555.c > > > @@ -90,6 +90,7 @@ enum { > > > }; > > > > > > enum { > > > + TCS4525_CHIP_ID_00 = 0, > > > TCS4525_CHIP_ID_12 = 12, > > > > This isn't a TCS4525, but a TCS4526. > > I'll update this to TCS4526_CHIP_ID_00 > > > > }; > > > > > > @@ -373,6 +374,7 @@ static int fan53555_voltages_setup_silergy(struct fan53555_device_info *di) > > > static int fan53526_voltages_setup_tcs(struct fan53555_device_info *di) > > > { > > > switch (di->chip_id) { > > > + case TCS4525_CHIP_ID_00: > > > case TCS4525_CHIP_ID_12: > > > di->slew_reg = TCS4525_TIME; > > > di->slew_mask = TCS_SLEW_MASK; > > > @@ -564,6 +566,9 @@ static const struct of_device_id __maybe_unused fan53555_dt_ids[] = { > > > }, { > > > .compatible = "tcs,tcs4525", > > > .data = (void *)FAN53526_VENDOR_TCS > > > + }, { > > > + .compatible = "tcs,tcs4526", > > > + .data = (void *)FAN53526_VENDOR_TCS > > > > Since you aren't adding any functional code, is there a particular > > reason you can't just add the chip id and simply use the tcs4525 > > compatible? > > This will prevent you from needing to modify the dt-bindings as well. > > In and earlier commit to the BSP kernel the proposal was to rename to > tcs452x. ref: > https://github.com/CK-LINUX/kernel/commit/b3bbe8018c56362feed1e49c8d243a8dbcdcc07b > > I chose to follow the example of silergy,syr827 and silergy,syr828 for > tcs4526 (given I made the mistake in assuming that support for tcs4525 > meant support for tcs4525.) This would maintain consistency of naming of > tcs4526 throughout the source. Is that ok? > > > > }, > > > { } > > > }; > > > @@ -672,6 +677,9 @@ static const struct i2c_device_id fan53555_id[] = { > > > }, { > > > .name = "tcs4525", > > > .driver_data = FAN53526_VENDOR_TCS > > > + }, { > > > + .name = "tcs4526", > > > + .driver_data = FAN53526_VENDOR_TCS > > > }, > > > { }, > > > }; > > > -- > > > 2.29.2 > > > > > Below is the draft patch for the dtsi includeing the 2 missing regulators and > to enable the GPU on the Radxa Rock Pi N10 which utilises the VMARC RK3399Pro SoM. > > This will be submitted seperately to the "tcs4526 regulator" patch. > > --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399pro-vmarc-som.dtsi 2021-05-08 09:11:59.000000000 +0000 > +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399pro-vmarc-som.dtsi 2021-05-08 09:11:59.000000000 +0000 > @@ -57,6 +57,22 @@ > pinctrl-0 = <&hdmi_cec>; > }; > > +&hdmi_sound { > + status = "okay"; > +}; > + > +&gpu { > + mali-supply = <&vdd_gpu>; > + assigned-clocks = <&cru ACLK_GPU>; > + assigned-clock-rates = <200000000>; > + status = "okay"; > + /delete-property/ operating-points-v2; As Peter rightly said, this will prevent gpu devfreq from working. > +}; > + > +&vopl { > + status = "disabled"; Out of curiosity, why disabling the little VOP? > +}; > + > &i2c0 { > clock-frequency = <400000>; > i2c-scl-falling-time-ns = <30>; > @@ -289,6 +288,50 @@ > }; > }; > }; > + > + vdd_cpu_b: tcs4525@1c { > + compatible = "tcs,tcs4525"; > + reg = <0x1c>; > + vin-supply = <&vcc5v0_sys>; > + regulator-compatible = "fan53555-reg"; I can be wrong, but I think regulator-compatible is deprecated. > + pinctrl-0 = <&vsel1_gpio>; > + vsel-gpios = <&gpio1 RK_PC1 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>; Is vsel-gpios ever used in the mainline driver? > + regulator-name = "vdd_cpu_b"; > + regulator-min-microvolt = <712500>; > + regulator-max-microvolt = <1500000>; > + regulator-ramp-delay = <2300>; > + fcs,suspend-voltage-selector = <1>; > + regulator-always-on; > + regulator-boot-on; > + regulator-initial-state = <3>; > + regulator-state-mem { > + regulator-off-in-suspend; > + }; > + }; > + > + vdd_gpu: tcs4526@10 { > + compatible = "tcs,tcs4526"; > + reg = <0x10>; > + vin-supply = <&vcc5v0_sys>; > + regulator-compatible = "fan53555-reg"; Ditto. > + pinctrl-0 = <&vsel2_gpio>; > + vsel-gpios = <&gpio1 RK_PB6 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>; Ditto. > + regulator-name = "vdd_gpu"; > + regulator-min-microvolt = <735000>; > + regulator-max-microvolt = <1400000>; > + regulator-ramp-delay = <1000>; > + fcs,suspend-voltage-selector = <1>; > + regulator-always-on; > + regulator-boot-on; Just out of curiosity, is regulator-boot-on really needed for the GPU? Thanks, Ezequiel
Hi Ezequiel and Peter, Thanks for the feedback. On Thu, May 27, 2021 at 08:51:27AM -0300, Ezequiel Garcia wrote: > Hi Rudi, > > Thanks for the patch. > > On Thu, 2021-05-27 at 10:59 +0000, Rudi Heitbaum wrote: > > On Wed, May 26, 2021 at 02:41:00PM -0400, Peter Geis wrote: > > > On Wed, May 26, 2021 at 12:23 PM Rudi Heitbaum <rudi@heitbaum.com> wrote: ... > > I chose to follow the example of silergy,syr827 and silergy,syr828 for > > tcs4526 (given I made the mistake in assuming that support for tcs4525 > > meant support for tcs4525.) This would maintain consistency of naming > > of > > tcs4526 throughout the source. Is that ok? > > It's fine to have both compatibles (and avoids confusion in > device-trees), just remember to update the dt-bindings as well. > It's funny to see drivers with both schemes, so we really have to > decide which path we want to go down. > Considering the syr827/syr828 as convention, we should probably just > go down that route for consistency within the driver. Thanks Peter - I will resubmit the tcs4526 patch along these lines. > > Removal of the operating points kind of makes the gpu regulator > > moot, don't you think? > As Peter rightly said, this will prevent gpu devfreq from working. This is the draft that I have been working on within LibreELEC10, still a ways to go I'm afraid. Having decided to getting the SBC to run mainline kernel and u-boot. The regulator and subsequent regulator fix will hopefully address https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=212917 too. As you have identified - it is not ready for upstreaming :-) Thank you both for the direction and pointers on the dts. I will get the v2 patch going first. > Out of curiosity, why disabling the little VOP? Only disabled within my WIP dts so as to focus my attention on successful running of LE10 on the rk3399pro, before I move to attempting to enable the NPU and the other nodes. > I can be wrong, but I think regulator-compatible is deprecated. I will look it to this. Now with the addition of the regulator and Peter's fix I will start qualifing each of the dts nodes and the correct options against the schematic. > > +??????????????????????????????vsel-gpios = <&gpio1 RK_PC1 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>; > > Is vsel-gpios ever used in the mainline driver? > > > +??????????????????????????????regulator-compatible = "fan53555-reg"; > > Ditto. > > > +??????????????????????????????vsel-gpios = <&gpio1 RK_PB6 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>; > > Ditto. > > > +??????????????????????????????regulator-boot-on; > > Just out of curiosity, is regulator-boot-on really needed for the GPU? Will check.
On Thu, May 27, 2021 at 07:26:01AM -0400, Peter Geis wrote: > On Thu, May 27, 2021 at 6:59 AM Rudi Heitbaum <rudi@heitbaum.com> wrote: > > > Since you aren't adding any functional code, is there a particular > > > reason you can't just add the chip id and simply use the tcs4525 > > > compatible? > > > This will prevent you from needing to modify the dt-bindings as well. .. > > I chose to follow the example of silergy,syr827 and silergy,syr828 for > > tcs4526 (given I made the mistake in assuming that support for tcs4525 > > meant support for tcs4525.) This would maintain consistency of naming of > > tcs4526 throughout the source. Is that ok? > It's fine to have both compatibles (and avoids confusion in > device-trees), just remember to update the dt-bindings as well. > It's funny to see drivers with both schemes, so we really have to > decide which path we want to go down. > Considering the syr827/syr828 as convention, we should probably just > go down that route for consistency within the driver. It is generally safer for the DT to be explicit about exactly what the hardware is and then double check that this matches the actual hardware, this gives more room for handling things with quirks if needed in future and makes the life of people writing DTs for boards easier since they don't need to remap part numbers from the schematic to the DT. > > +&gpu { > > + mali-supply = <&vdd_gpu>; > > + assigned-clocks = <&cru ACLK_GPU>; > > + assigned-clock-rates = <200000000>; > > + status = "okay"; > > + /delete-property/ operating-points-v2; > Removal of the operating points kind of makes the gpu regulator moot, > don't you think? It's still better to say what the supply is even if it can't be changed - that stops you getting warnings about substituting in a dummy regulator and allows the consumer to read the current state of the regulator in case that's useful.
On Thu, May 27, 2021 at 08:51:27AM -0300, Ezequiel Garcia wrote: > On Thu, 2021-05-27 at 10:59 +0000, Rudi Heitbaum wrote: > > + reg = <0x1c>; > > + vin-supply = <&vcc5v0_sys>; > > + regulator-compatible = "fan53555-reg"; > I can be wrong, but I think regulator-compatible is deprecated. Yes. > > + regulator-ramp-delay = <1000>; > > + fcs,suspend-voltage-selector = <1>; > > + regulator-always-on; > > + regulator-boot-on; > Just out of curiosity, is regulator-boot-on really needed for the GPU? It should only be used if it's not possible to read the state of the regulator enable from the hardware. Please delete unneeded context from mails when replying. Doing this makes it much easier to find your reply in the message, helping ensure it won't be missed by people scrolling through the irrelevant quoted material.
Hi Mark, I have submiited the v2 patch. Thanks for the feedback too. On Thu, May 27, 2021 at 02:05:53PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote: > On Thu, May 27, 2021 at 08:51:27AM -0300, Ezequiel Garcia wrote: > > On Thu, 2021-05-27 at 10:59 +0000, Rudi Heitbaum wrote: > > > + /delete-property/ operating-points-v2; > > Removal of the operating points kind of makes the gpu regulator moot, > > don't you think? > It's still better to say what the supply is even if it can't be > changed - that stops you getting warnings about substituting in a > dummy regulator and allows the consumer to read the current state > of the regulator in case that's useful. I'll look into this. Thank you all for the feedback and direction on the dts. > > > +???????????????regulator-compatible = "fan53555-reg"; > > > I can be wrong, but I think regulator-compatible is deprecated. > > Yes. will action > > > +???????????????regulator-boot-on; > > > Just out of curiosity, is regulator-boot-on really needed for the GPU? > > It should only be used if it's not possible to read the state of > the regulator enable from the hardware. will do further testing
diff --git a/drivers/regulator/fan53555.c b/drivers/regulator/fan53555.c index 2695be617373..ddab9359ea20 100644 --- a/drivers/regulator/fan53555.c +++ b/drivers/regulator/fan53555.c @@ -90,6 +90,7 @@ enum { }; enum { + TCS4525_CHIP_ID_00 = 0, TCS4525_CHIP_ID_12 = 12, }; @@ -373,6 +374,7 @@ static int fan53555_voltages_setup_silergy(struct fan53555_device_info *di) static int fan53526_voltages_setup_tcs(struct fan53555_device_info *di) { switch (di->chip_id) { + case TCS4525_CHIP_ID_00: case TCS4525_CHIP_ID_12: di->slew_reg = TCS4525_TIME; di->slew_mask = TCS_SLEW_MASK; @@ -564,6 +566,9 @@ static const struct of_device_id __maybe_unused fan53555_dt_ids[] = { }, { .compatible = "tcs,tcs4525", .data = (void *)FAN53526_VENDOR_TCS + }, { + .compatible = "tcs,tcs4526", + .data = (void *)FAN53526_VENDOR_TCS }, { } }; @@ -672,6 +677,9 @@ static const struct i2c_device_id fan53555_id[] = { }, { .name = "tcs4525", .driver_data = FAN53526_VENDOR_TCS + }, { + .name = "tcs4526", + .driver_data = FAN53526_VENDOR_TCS }, { }, };
For rk3399pro boards the tcs4526 regulator supports the vdd_gpu regulator. The tcs4526 regulator has a chip id of <0>. Add the compatibile tcs,tcs4526 without this patch, the dmesg output is: fan53555-regulator 0-0010: Chip ID 0 not supported! fan53555-regulator 0-0010: Failed to setup device! fan53555-regulator: probe of 0-0010 failed with error -22 with this patch, the dmesg output is: vdd_gpu: supplied by vcc5v0_sys The regulators are described as: - Dedicated power management IC TCS4525 - Lithium battery protection chip TCS4526 This has been tested with a Radxa Rock Pi N10. Fixes: f9028dcdf589 ("regulator: fan53555: only bind tcs4525 to correct chip id") Signed-off-by: Rudi Heitbaum <rudi@heitbaum.com> --- drivers/regulator/fan53555.c | 8 ++++++++ 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)