| Message ID | 20240726194948.109326-3-macroalpha82@gmail.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
| Series | Add GameForce Ace | expand |
Hi, On Fri, Jul 26, 2024 at 02:49:45PM GMT, Chris Morgan wrote: > From: Chris Morgan <macromorgan@hotmail.com> > > The Cellwise cw2015 datasheet reports that it can handle two cells > in a series configuration. Allow a device tree parameter to note > this condition so that the driver reports the correct voltage values > to userspace. I found this: http://www.cellwise-semi.com/Public/assests/menu/20230302/6400076806706.pdf Which says: CW2015 can be used in 2 or more batteries connected in series, or several cells connected in parallel. So dual-cell seems like a bad property name. Instead the number of serial cells should be provided. This property is then not really specific to the Cellwise fuel gauge and instead a property of the battery pack (i.e. simple-battery.yaml). > Signed-off-by: Chris Morgan <macromorgan@hotmail.com> > --- > drivers/power/supply/cw2015_battery.c | 7 +++++++ > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/drivers/power/supply/cw2015_battery.c b/drivers/power/supply/cw2015_battery.c > index f63c3c410451..b23a6d4fa4fa 100644 > --- a/drivers/power/supply/cw2015_battery.c > +++ b/drivers/power/supply/cw2015_battery.c > @@ -77,6 +77,8 @@ struct cw_battery { > u32 poll_interval_ms; > u8 alert_level; > > + bool dual_cell; > + > unsigned int read_errors; > unsigned int charge_stuck_cnt; > }; > @@ -325,6 +327,9 @@ static int cw_get_voltage(struct cw_battery *cw_bat) > */ > voltage_mv = avg * 312 / 1024; > > + if (cw_bat->dual_cell) > + voltage_mv *= 2; Unfortunately there are no details in the document, but this looks very fishy. Does it only measure the first cell and hope that the other cells have the same voltage? This (unmerged) series also applies to your problem to some degree: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240416121818.543896-3-mike.looijmans@topic.nl/ -- Sebastian > dev_dbg(cw_bat->dev, "Read voltage: %d mV, raw=0x%04x\n", > voltage_mv, reg_val); > return voltage_mv; > @@ -587,6 +592,8 @@ static int cw2015_parse_properties(struct cw_battery *cw_bat) > return ret; > } > > + cw_bat->dual_cell = device_property_read_bool(dev, "cellwise,dual-cell"); > + > ret = device_property_read_u32(dev, "cellwise,monitor-interval-ms", > &cw_bat->poll_interval_ms); > if (ret) { > -- > 2.34.1 > >
On Fri, Jul 26, 2024 at 11:06:21PM +0200, Sebastian Reichel wrote: > Hi, > > On Fri, Jul 26, 2024 at 02:49:45PM GMT, Chris Morgan wrote: > > From: Chris Morgan <macromorgan@hotmail.com> > > > > The Cellwise cw2015 datasheet reports that it can handle two cells > > in a series configuration. Allow a device tree parameter to note > > this condition so that the driver reports the correct voltage values > > to userspace. > > I found this: > > http://www.cellwise-semi.com/Public/assests/menu/20230302/6400076806706.pdf > > Which says: > > CW2015 can be used in 2 or more batteries connected in series, or > several cells connected in parallel. > > So dual-cell seems like a bad property name. Instead the number of > serial cells should be provided. This property is then not really > specific to the Cellwise fuel gauge and instead a property of the > battery pack (i.e. simple-battery.yaml). It's conflicting information (which further confuses me). I see in that datasheet it says 2 or more, whereas the datasheet found here says only 2 cells: https://www.lestat.st/_media/informatique/projets/python-cw2015/cw2015-power-management-datasheet.pdf But I agree in principle that we should be setting this as a property of a simple-battery rather than a manufacturer specific parameter. > > > Signed-off-by: Chris Morgan <macromorgan@hotmail.com> > > --- > > drivers/power/supply/cw2015_battery.c | 7 +++++++ > > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/power/supply/cw2015_battery.c b/drivers/power/supply/cw2015_battery.c > > index f63c3c410451..b23a6d4fa4fa 100644 > > --- a/drivers/power/supply/cw2015_battery.c > > +++ b/drivers/power/supply/cw2015_battery.c > > @@ -77,6 +77,8 @@ struct cw_battery { > > u32 poll_interval_ms; > > u8 alert_level; > > > > + bool dual_cell; > > + > > unsigned int read_errors; > > unsigned int charge_stuck_cnt; > > }; > > @@ -325,6 +327,9 @@ static int cw_get_voltage(struct cw_battery *cw_bat) > > */ > > voltage_mv = avg * 312 / 1024; > > > > + if (cw_bat->dual_cell) > > + voltage_mv *= 2; > > Unfortunately there are no details in the document, but this looks > very fishy. Does it only measure the first cell and hope that the > other cells have the same voltage? > > This (unmerged) series also applies to your problem to some degree: > > https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240416121818.543896-3-mike.looijmans@topic.nl/ I think based on the application diagram it is in fact measuring the cell voltage. That said, this ultimately boils down to a cosmetic thing as not having this property simply means userspace sees the battery voltage as 3.8v instead of 7.6v as is written on the side. I think for simplification sake I will remove this from the series, add a note to the device tree, and wait for the other battery series to get pulled. When it gets pulled I'll request a device tree property so we can add POWER_SUPPLY_PROP_NUMBER_OF_SERIAL_CELLS to the simple-battery and then parse this value. Or if that series ends up getting abandoned I can just add a quick and dirty new property like this. Thank you, Chris > > -- Sebastian > > > dev_dbg(cw_bat->dev, "Read voltage: %d mV, raw=0x%04x\n", > > voltage_mv, reg_val); > > return voltage_mv; > > @@ -587,6 +592,8 @@ static int cw2015_parse_properties(struct cw_battery *cw_bat) > > return ret; > > } > > > > + cw_bat->dual_cell = device_property_read_bool(dev, "cellwise,dual-cell"); > > + > > ret = device_property_read_u32(dev, "cellwise,monitor-interval-ms", > > &cw_bat->poll_interval_ms); > > if (ret) { > > -- > > 2.34.1 > > > >
Hi, On Wed, Jul 31, 2024 at 11:02:11AM GMT, Chris Morgan wrote: > On Fri, Jul 26, 2024 at 11:06:21PM +0200, Sebastian Reichel wrote: > > Hi, > > > > On Fri, Jul 26, 2024 at 02:49:45PM GMT, Chris Morgan wrote: > > > From: Chris Morgan <macromorgan@hotmail.com> > > > > > > The Cellwise cw2015 datasheet reports that it can handle two cells > > > in a series configuration. Allow a device tree parameter to note > > > this condition so that the driver reports the correct voltage values > > > to userspace. > > > > I found this: > > > > http://www.cellwise-semi.com/Public/assests/menu/20230302/6400076806706.pdf > > > > Which says: > > > > CW2015 can be used in 2 or more batteries connected in series, or > > several cells connected in parallel. > > > > So dual-cell seems like a bad property name. Instead the number of > > serial cells should be provided. This property is then not really > > specific to the Cellwise fuel gauge and instead a property of the > > battery pack (i.e. simple-battery.yaml). > > It's conflicting information (which further confuses me). I see in that > datasheet it says 2 or more, whereas the datasheet found here says only > 2 cells: > > https://www.lestat.st/_media/informatique/projets/python-cw2015/cw2015-power-management-datasheet.pdf > > But I agree in principle that we should be setting this as a property > of a simple-battery rather than a manufacturer specific parameter. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Chris Morgan <macromorgan@hotmail.com> > > > --- > > > drivers/power/supply/cw2015_battery.c | 7 +++++++ > > > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+) > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/power/supply/cw2015_battery.c b/drivers/power/supply/cw2015_battery.c > > > index f63c3c410451..b23a6d4fa4fa 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/power/supply/cw2015_battery.c > > > +++ b/drivers/power/supply/cw2015_battery.c > > > @@ -77,6 +77,8 @@ struct cw_battery { > > > u32 poll_interval_ms; > > > u8 alert_level; > > > > > > + bool dual_cell; > > > + > > > unsigned int read_errors; > > > unsigned int charge_stuck_cnt; > > > }; > > > @@ -325,6 +327,9 @@ static int cw_get_voltage(struct cw_battery *cw_bat) > > > */ > > > voltage_mv = avg * 312 / 1024; > > > > > > + if (cw_bat->dual_cell) > > > + voltage_mv *= 2; > > > > Unfortunately there are no details in the document, but this looks > > very fishy. Does it only measure the first cell and hope that the > > other cells have the same voltage? > > > > This (unmerged) series also applies to your problem to some degree: > > > > https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240416121818.543896-3-mike.looijmans@topic.nl/ > > I think based on the application diagram it is in fact measuring the > cell voltage. > > That said, this ultimately boils down to a cosmetic thing > as not having this property simply means userspace sees the battery > voltage as 3.8v instead of 7.6v as is written on the side. With the cells being connected in serial, the voltage of both cells can be different. There is not "the cell voltage". Instead there is a voltage for cell 1 and a voltage for cell 2. In a perfect battery they are the same, but in reality they are not. In the extreme case one of the cells may be broken while the other is still fine. It sounds as if this is just measuring the voltage from the first cell and assumes the second cell has the same voltage. Ideally the voltage on these platforms is not exposed via the normal VOLTAGE property and instead uses a new property for telling userspace the voltage for a single cell. The kernel simply does not know the voltage of the whole battery pack. FWIW this is the worst battery measurement system I've seen so far if my understanding of the hardware design is correct. -- Sebastian > I think for simplification sake I will remove this from the series, add > a note to the device tree, and wait for the other battery series to get > pulled. When it gets pulled I'll request a device tree property so we > can add POWER_SUPPLY_PROP_NUMBER_OF_SERIAL_CELLS to the simple-battery > and then parse this value. Or if that series ends up getting abandoned > I can just add a quick and dirty new property like this. > > Thank you, > Chris > > > > > -- Sebastian > > > > > dev_dbg(cw_bat->dev, "Read voltage: %d mV, raw=0x%04x\n", > > > voltage_mv, reg_val); > > > return voltage_mv; > > > @@ -587,6 +592,8 @@ static int cw2015_parse_properties(struct cw_battery *cw_bat) > > > return ret; > > > } > > > > > > + cw_bat->dual_cell = device_property_read_bool(dev, "cellwise,dual-cell"); > > > + > > > ret = device_property_read_u32(dev, "cellwise,monitor-interval-ms", > > > &cw_bat->poll_interval_ms); > > > if (ret) { > > > -- > > > 2.34.1 > > > > > > > >
On Wed, Jul 31, 2024 at 07:02:28PM +0200, Sebastian Reichel wrote: > Hi, > > On Wed, Jul 31, 2024 at 11:02:11AM GMT, Chris Morgan wrote: > > On Fri, Jul 26, 2024 at 11:06:21PM +0200, Sebastian Reichel wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > On Fri, Jul 26, 2024 at 02:49:45PM GMT, Chris Morgan wrote: > > > > From: Chris Morgan <macromorgan@hotmail.com> > > > > > > > > The Cellwise cw2015 datasheet reports that it can handle two cells > > > > in a series configuration. Allow a device tree parameter to note > > > > this condition so that the driver reports the correct voltage values > > > > to userspace. > > > > > > I found this: > > > > > > http://www.cellwise-semi.com/Public/assests/menu/20230302/6400076806706.pdf > > > > > > Which says: > > > > > > CW2015 can be used in 2 or more batteries connected in series, or > > > several cells connected in parallel. > > > > > > So dual-cell seems like a bad property name. Instead the number of > > > serial cells should be provided. This property is then not really > > > specific to the Cellwise fuel gauge and instead a property of the > > > battery pack (i.e. simple-battery.yaml). > > > > It's conflicting information (which further confuses me). I see in that > > datasheet it says 2 or more, whereas the datasheet found here says only > > 2 cells: > > > > https://www.lestat.st/_media/informatique/projets/python-cw2015/cw2015-power-management-datasheet.pdf > > > > But I agree in principle that we should be setting this as a property > > of a simple-battery rather than a manufacturer specific parameter. > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Chris Morgan <macromorgan@hotmail.com> > > > > --- > > > > drivers/power/supply/cw2015_battery.c | 7 +++++++ > > > > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+) > > > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/power/supply/cw2015_battery.c b/drivers/power/supply/cw2015_battery.c > > > > index f63c3c410451..b23a6d4fa4fa 100644 > > > > --- a/drivers/power/supply/cw2015_battery.c > > > > +++ b/drivers/power/supply/cw2015_battery.c > > > > @@ -77,6 +77,8 @@ struct cw_battery { > > > > u32 poll_interval_ms; > > > > u8 alert_level; > > > > > > > > + bool dual_cell; > > > > + > > > > unsigned int read_errors; > > > > unsigned int charge_stuck_cnt; > > > > }; > > > > @@ -325,6 +327,9 @@ static int cw_get_voltage(struct cw_battery *cw_bat) > > > > */ > > > > voltage_mv = avg * 312 / 1024; > > > > > > > > + if (cw_bat->dual_cell) > > > > + voltage_mv *= 2; > > > > > > Unfortunately there are no details in the document, but this looks > > > very fishy. Does it only measure the first cell and hope that the > > > other cells have the same voltage? > > > > > > This (unmerged) series also applies to your problem to some degree: > > > > > > https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240416121818.543896-3-mike.looijmans@topic.nl/ > > > > I think based on the application diagram it is in fact measuring the > > cell voltage. > > > > That said, this ultimately boils down to a cosmetic thing > > as not having this property simply means userspace sees the battery > > voltage as 3.8v instead of 7.6v as is written on the side. > > With the cells being connected in serial, the voltage of both cells > can be different. There is not "the cell voltage". Instead there is > a voltage for cell 1 and a voltage for cell 2. In a perfect battery > they are the same, but in reality they are not. In the extreme case > one of the cells may be broken while the other is still fine. It > sounds as if this is just measuring the voltage from the first > cell and assumes the second cell has the same voltage. > > Ideally the voltage on these platforms is not exposed via the normal > VOLTAGE property and instead uses a new property for telling > userspace the voltage for a single cell. The kernel simply does not > know the voltage of the whole battery pack. > > FWIW this is the worst battery measurement system I've seen so far > if my understanding of the hardware design is correct. > > -- Sebastian > Don't get me started, this whole stack is a nightmare. The battery won't charge at all without a bq25703 driver (so this current DTS basically has the device running while plugged in); and for some reason the fcs,fc302 chip wants to go interrupt crazy if you're not using a PD charger. Part of the reason of getting this upstreamed is so I can have a common base for others to help me get this last bit of nonsense sorted out. Displaying the correct voltage on the battery however isn't critical, as the device will still report the correct SoC and will even charge and function just fine when a driver is in place for the bq25703. It's just the voltage reported in sysfs will be wrong. Thank you, Chris > > I think for simplification sake I will remove this from the series, add > > a note to the device tree, and wait for the other battery series to get > > pulled. When it gets pulled I'll request a device tree property so we > > can add POWER_SUPPLY_PROP_NUMBER_OF_SERIAL_CELLS to the simple-battery > > and then parse this value. Or if that series ends up getting abandoned > > I can just add a quick and dirty new property like this. > > > > > > Thank you, > > Chris > > > > > > > > -- Sebastian > > > > > > > dev_dbg(cw_bat->dev, "Read voltage: %d mV, raw=0x%04x\n", > > > > voltage_mv, reg_val); > > > > return voltage_mv; > > > > @@ -587,6 +592,8 @@ static int cw2015_parse_properties(struct cw_battery *cw_bat) > > > > return ret; > > > > } > > > > > > > > + cw_bat->dual_cell = device_property_read_bool(dev, "cellwise,dual-cell"); > > > > + > > > > ret = device_property_read_u32(dev, "cellwise,monitor-interval-ms", > > > > &cw_bat->poll_interval_ms); > > > > if (ret) { > > > > -- > > > > 2.34.1 > > > > > > > > > > > >
Hello all, On 2024-07-31 19:02, Sebastian Reichel wrote: > On Wed, Jul 31, 2024 at 11:02:11AM GMT, Chris Morgan wrote: >> On Fri, Jul 26, 2024 at 11:06:21PM +0200, Sebastian Reichel wrote: >> > On Fri, Jul 26, 2024 at 02:49:45PM GMT, Chris Morgan wrote: >> > > From: Chris Morgan <macromorgan@hotmail.com> >> > > >> > > The Cellwise cw2015 datasheet reports that it can handle two cells >> > > in a series configuration. Allow a device tree parameter to note >> > > this condition so that the driver reports the correct voltage values >> > > to userspace. >> > >> > I found this: >> > >> > http://www.cellwise-semi.com/Public/assests/menu/20230302/6400076806706.pdf >> > >> > Which says: >> > >> > CW2015 can be used in 2 or more batteries connected in series, or >> > several cells connected in parallel. >> > >> > So dual-cell seems like a bad property name. Instead the number of >> > serial cells should be provided. This property is then not really >> > specific to the Cellwise fuel gauge and instead a property of the >> > battery pack (i.e. simple-battery.yaml). >> >> It's conflicting information (which further confuses me). I see in >> that >> datasheet it says 2 or more, whereas the datasheet found here says >> only >> 2 cells: >> >> https://www.lestat.st/_media/informatique/projets/python-cw2015/cw2015-power-management-datasheet.pdf >> >> But I agree in principle that we should be setting this as a property >> of a simple-battery rather than a manufacturer specific parameter. >> >> > >> > > Signed-off-by: Chris Morgan <macromorgan@hotmail.com> >> > > --- >> > > drivers/power/supply/cw2015_battery.c | 7 +++++++ >> > > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+) >> > > >> > > diff --git a/drivers/power/supply/cw2015_battery.c b/drivers/power/supply/cw2015_battery.c >> > > index f63c3c410451..b23a6d4fa4fa 100644 >> > > --- a/drivers/power/supply/cw2015_battery.c >> > > +++ b/drivers/power/supply/cw2015_battery.c >> > > @@ -77,6 +77,8 @@ struct cw_battery { >> > > u32 poll_interval_ms; >> > > u8 alert_level; >> > > >> > > + bool dual_cell; >> > > + >> > > unsigned int read_errors; >> > > unsigned int charge_stuck_cnt; >> > > }; >> > > @@ -325,6 +327,9 @@ static int cw_get_voltage(struct cw_battery *cw_bat) >> > > */ >> > > voltage_mv = avg * 312 / 1024; >> > > >> > > + if (cw_bat->dual_cell) >> > > + voltage_mv *= 2; >> > >> > Unfortunately there are no details in the document, but this looks >> > very fishy. Does it only measure the first cell and hope that the >> > other cells have the same voltage? >> > >> > This (unmerged) series also applies to your problem to some degree: >> > >> > https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240416121818.543896-3-mike.looijmans@topic.nl/ >> >> I think based on the application diagram it is in fact measuring the >> cell voltage. >> >> That said, this ultimately boils down to a cosmetic thing >> as not having this property simply means userspace sees the battery >> voltage as 3.8v instead of 7.6v as is written on the side. > > With the cells being connected in serial, the voltage of both cells > can be different. There is not "the cell voltage". Instead there is > a voltage for cell 1 and a voltage for cell 2. In a perfect battery > they are the same, but in reality they are not. In the extreme case > one of the cells may be broken while the other is still fine. It > sounds as if this is just measuring the voltage from the first > cell and assumes the second cell has the same voltage. > > Ideally the voltage on these platforms is not exposed via the normal > VOLTAGE property and instead uses a new property for telling > userspace the voltage for a single cell. The kernel simply does not > know the voltage of the whole battery pack. > > FWIW this is the worst battery measurement system I've seen so far > if my understanding of the hardware design is correct. Please note that two facts should be considered here: - The GenBook schematic [1] clearly shows that the individual battery cells aren't exposed at its internal battery connector and, as a result, aren't available for individual cell voltage monitoring - The GenBook uses a CW2013 as it fuel gauge, [1] instead of CW2015 as mentioned here a few times, but I haven't went through the CW2013 datasheet(s) yet to see what are the actual differences between it and the CW2015 [1] https://wiki.cool-pi.com/notebook/coolpi-genbook-v20.pdf >> I think for simplification sake I will remove this from the series, >> add >> a note to the device tree, and wait for the other battery series to >> get >> pulled. When it gets pulled I'll request a device tree property so we >> can add POWER_SUPPLY_PROP_NUMBER_OF_SERIAL_CELLS to the simple-battery >> and then parse this value. Or if that series ends up getting abandoned >> I can just add a quick and dirty new property like this. >> > >> > > dev_dbg(cw_bat->dev, "Read voltage: %d mV, raw=0x%04x\n", >> > > voltage_mv, reg_val); >> > > return voltage_mv; >> > > @@ -587,6 +592,8 @@ static int cw2015_parse_properties(struct cw_battery *cw_bat) >> > > return ret; >> > > } >> > > >> > > + cw_bat->dual_cell = device_property_read_bool(dev, "cellwise,dual-cell"); >> > > + >> > > ret = device_property_read_u32(dev, "cellwise,monitor-interval-ms", >> > > &cw_bat->poll_interval_ms); >> > > if (ret) { >> > > -- >> > > 2.34.1
Hi, On Fri, Aug 02, 2024 at 11:39:24PM GMT, Dragan Simic wrote: > On 2024-07-31 19:02, Sebastian Reichel wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 31, 2024 at 11:02:11AM GMT, Chris Morgan wrote: > > > On Fri, Jul 26, 2024 at 11:06:21PM +0200, Sebastian Reichel wrote: > > > > On Fri, Jul 26, 2024 at 02:49:45PM GMT, Chris Morgan wrote: > > > > > From: Chris Morgan <macromorgan@hotmail.com> > > > > > > > > > > The Cellwise cw2015 datasheet reports that it can handle two cells > > > > > in a series configuration. Allow a device tree parameter to note > > > > > this condition so that the driver reports the correct voltage values > > > > > to userspace. > > > > > > > > I found this: > > > > > > > > http://www.cellwise-semi.com/Public/assests/menu/20230302/6400076806706.pdf > > > > > > > > Which says: > > > > > > > > CW2015 can be used in 2 or more batteries connected in series, or > > > > several cells connected in parallel. > > > > > > > > So dual-cell seems like a bad property name. Instead the number of > > > > serial cells should be provided. This property is then not really > > > > specific to the Cellwise fuel gauge and instead a property of the > > > > battery pack (i.e. simple-battery.yaml). > > > > > > It's conflicting information (which further confuses me). I see in > > > that > > > datasheet it says 2 or more, whereas the datasheet found here says > > > only > > > 2 cells: > > > > > > https://www.lestat.st/_media/informatique/projets/python-cw2015/cw2015-power-management-datasheet.pdf > > > > > > But I agree in principle that we should be setting this as a property > > > of a simple-battery rather than a manufacturer specific parameter. > > > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Chris Morgan <macromorgan@hotmail.com> > > > > > --- > > > > > drivers/power/supply/cw2015_battery.c | 7 +++++++ > > > > > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+) > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/power/supply/cw2015_battery.c b/drivers/power/supply/cw2015_battery.c > > > > > index f63c3c410451..b23a6d4fa4fa 100644 > > > > > --- a/drivers/power/supply/cw2015_battery.c > > > > > +++ b/drivers/power/supply/cw2015_battery.c > > > > > @@ -77,6 +77,8 @@ struct cw_battery { > > > > > u32 poll_interval_ms; > > > > > u8 alert_level; > > > > > > > > > > + bool dual_cell; > > > > > + > > > > > unsigned int read_errors; > > > > > unsigned int charge_stuck_cnt; > > > > > }; > > > > > @@ -325,6 +327,9 @@ static int cw_get_voltage(struct cw_battery *cw_bat) > > > > > */ > > > > > voltage_mv = avg * 312 / 1024; > > > > > > > > > > + if (cw_bat->dual_cell) > > > > > + voltage_mv *= 2; > > > > > > > > Unfortunately there are no details in the document, but this looks > > > > very fishy. Does it only measure the first cell and hope that the > > > > other cells have the same voltage? > > > > > > > > This (unmerged) series also applies to your problem to some degree: > > > > > > > > https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240416121818.543896-3-mike.looijmans@topic.nl/ > > > > > > I think based on the application diagram it is in fact measuring the > > > cell voltage. > > > > > > That said, this ultimately boils down to a cosmetic thing > > > as not having this property simply means userspace sees the battery > > > voltage as 3.8v instead of 7.6v as is written on the side. > > > > With the cells being connected in serial, the voltage of both cells > > can be different. There is not "the cell voltage". Instead there is > > a voltage for cell 1 and a voltage for cell 2. In a perfect battery > > they are the same, but in reality they are not. In the extreme case > > one of the cells may be broken while the other is still fine. It > > sounds as if this is just measuring the voltage from the first > > cell and assumes the second cell has the same voltage. > > > > Ideally the voltage on these platforms is not exposed via the normal > > VOLTAGE property and instead uses a new property for telling > > userspace the voltage for a single cell. The kernel simply does not > > know the voltage of the whole battery pack. > > > > FWIW this is the worst battery measurement system I've seen so far > > if my understanding of the hardware design is correct. > > Please note that two facts should be considered here: > > - The GenBook schematic [1] clearly shows that the individual battery > cells aren't exposed at its internal battery connector and, as a > result, aren't available for individual cell voltage monitoring > > - The GenBook uses a CW2013 as it fuel gauge, [1] instead of CW2015 > as mentioned here a few times, but I haven't went through the CW2013 > datasheet(s) yet to see what are the actual differences between it > and the CW2015 > > [1] https://wiki.cool-pi.com/notebook/coolpi-genbook-v20.pdf Ah, thanks for pointing to the schematics. So the fuel gauge can only measure the voltage of the whole battery, but VCELL register provides the voltage for 1 cell? What is the origin of the dual-cell property? Was this something you came up with yourself when noticing the wrong voltage? Based on the above information my guess would be that CW2013 uses a different voltage resolution than CW2015 for the VCELL register. The datasheet for CW2015 says 14bit ADC with 305uV resolution. Maybe the CW2013 simply uses a different ADC. Do you have the datasheet for the chip? -- Sebastian
Hello Sebastian, (I'm adding a couple of Cool Pi contacts to the Cc list.) On 2024-08-04 18:29, Sebastian Reichel wrote: > On Fri, Aug 02, 2024 at 11:39:24PM GMT, Dragan Simic wrote: >> On 2024-07-31 19:02, Sebastian Reichel wrote: >> > On Wed, Jul 31, 2024 at 11:02:11AM GMT, Chris Morgan wrote: >> > > On Fri, Jul 26, 2024 at 11:06:21PM +0200, Sebastian Reichel wrote: >> > > > On Fri, Jul 26, 2024 at 02:49:45PM GMT, Chris Morgan wrote: >> > > > > From: Chris Morgan <macromorgan@hotmail.com> >> > > > > >> > > > > The Cellwise cw2015 datasheet reports that it can handle two cells >> > > > > in a series configuration. Allow a device tree parameter to note >> > > > > this condition so that the driver reports the correct voltage values >> > > > > to userspace. >> > > > >> > > > I found this: >> > > > >> > > > http://www.cellwise-semi.com/Public/assests/menu/20230302/6400076806706.pdf >> > > > >> > > > Which says: >> > > > >> > > > CW2015 can be used in 2 or more batteries connected in series, or >> > > > several cells connected in parallel. >> > > > >> > > > So dual-cell seems like a bad property name. Instead the number of >> > > > serial cells should be provided. This property is then not really >> > > > specific to the Cellwise fuel gauge and instead a property of the >> > > > battery pack (i.e. simple-battery.yaml). >> > > >> > > It's conflicting information (which further confuses me). I see in >> > > that >> > > datasheet it says 2 or more, whereas the datasheet found here says >> > > only >> > > 2 cells: >> > > >> > > https://www.lestat.st/_media/informatique/projets/python-cw2015/cw2015-power-management-datasheet.pdf >> > > >> > > But I agree in principle that we should be setting this as a property >> > > of a simple-battery rather than a manufacturer specific parameter. >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > Signed-off-by: Chris Morgan <macromorgan@hotmail.com> >> > > > > --- >> > > > > drivers/power/supply/cw2015_battery.c | 7 +++++++ >> > > > > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+) >> > > > > >> > > > > diff --git a/drivers/power/supply/cw2015_battery.c b/drivers/power/supply/cw2015_battery.c >> > > > > index f63c3c410451..b23a6d4fa4fa 100644 >> > > > > --- a/drivers/power/supply/cw2015_battery.c >> > > > > +++ b/drivers/power/supply/cw2015_battery.c >> > > > > @@ -77,6 +77,8 @@ struct cw_battery { >> > > > > u32 poll_interval_ms; >> > > > > u8 alert_level; >> > > > > >> > > > > + bool dual_cell; >> > > > > + >> > > > > unsigned int read_errors; >> > > > > unsigned int charge_stuck_cnt; >> > > > > }; >> > > > > @@ -325,6 +327,9 @@ static int cw_get_voltage(struct cw_battery *cw_bat) >> > > > > */ >> > > > > voltage_mv = avg * 312 / 1024; >> > > > > >> > > > > + if (cw_bat->dual_cell) >> > > > > + voltage_mv *= 2; >> > > > >> > > > Unfortunately there are no details in the document, but this looks >> > > > very fishy. Does it only measure the first cell and hope that the >> > > > other cells have the same voltage? >> > > > >> > > > This (unmerged) series also applies to your problem to some degree: >> > > > >> > > > https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240416121818.543896-3-mike.looijmans@topic.nl/ >> > > >> > > I think based on the application diagram it is in fact measuring the >> > > cell voltage. >> > > >> > > That said, this ultimately boils down to a cosmetic thing >> > > as not having this property simply means userspace sees the battery >> > > voltage as 3.8v instead of 7.6v as is written on the side. >> > >> > With the cells being connected in serial, the voltage of both cells >> > can be different. There is not "the cell voltage". Instead there is >> > a voltage for cell 1 and a voltage for cell 2. In a perfect battery >> > they are the same, but in reality they are not. In the extreme case >> > one of the cells may be broken while the other is still fine. It >> > sounds as if this is just measuring the voltage from the first >> > cell and assumes the second cell has the same voltage. >> > >> > Ideally the voltage on these platforms is not exposed via the normal >> > VOLTAGE property and instead uses a new property for telling >> > userspace the voltage for a single cell. The kernel simply does not >> > know the voltage of the whole battery pack. >> > >> > FWIW this is the worst battery measurement system I've seen so far >> > if my understanding of the hardware design is correct. >> >> Please note that two facts should be considered here: >> >> - The GenBook schematic [1] clearly shows that the individual battery >> cells aren't exposed at its internal battery connector and, as a >> result, aren't available for individual cell voltage monitoring >> >> - The GenBook uses a CW2013 as it fuel gauge, [1] instead of CW2015 >> as mentioned here a few times, but I haven't went through the >> CW2013 >> datasheet(s) yet to see what are the actual differences between it >> and the CW2015 >> >> [1] https://wiki.cool-pi.com/notebook/coolpi-genbook-v20.pdf > > Ah, thanks for pointing to the schematics. So the fuel gauge can > only measure the voltage of the whole battery, but VCELL register > provides the voltage for 1 cell? What is the origin of the dual-cell > property? Was this something you came up with yourself when noticing > the wrong voltage? I'm not sure where does the idea for the dual-cell property come from, but please note that it wasn't me who invented it, so to speak. :) I don't even have the required hardware to test and develop these patches on, i.e. I don't have a CM5-based GenBook. > Based on the above information my guess would be that CW2013 uses a > different voltage resolution than CW2015 for the VCELL register. The > datasheet for CW2015 says 14bit ADC with 305uV resolution. Maybe > the CW2013 simply uses a different ADC. Do you have the datasheet > for the chip? I've managed to find a few (seemingly a bit different) CW2013 datasheets, but as usual with CellWise, some of them may contain a bit confusing or incomplete information. I'd suggest that you wait for a couple of days until I sift through the obtained datasheets, to save you from doing the same. :) Of course, I'll then send over the datasheet that seems correct and the most complete to me. I'll see to add support for CW2013 to the cw2015 driver, for which I already have a couple of pending cleanup patches.
diff --git a/drivers/power/supply/cw2015_battery.c b/drivers/power/supply/cw2015_battery.c index f63c3c410451..b23a6d4fa4fa 100644 --- a/drivers/power/supply/cw2015_battery.c +++ b/drivers/power/supply/cw2015_battery.c @@ -77,6 +77,8 @@ struct cw_battery { u32 poll_interval_ms; u8 alert_level; + bool dual_cell; + unsigned int read_errors; unsigned int charge_stuck_cnt; }; @@ -325,6 +327,9 @@ static int cw_get_voltage(struct cw_battery *cw_bat) */ voltage_mv = avg * 312 / 1024; + if (cw_bat->dual_cell) + voltage_mv *= 2; + dev_dbg(cw_bat->dev, "Read voltage: %d mV, raw=0x%04x\n", voltage_mv, reg_val); return voltage_mv; @@ -587,6 +592,8 @@ static int cw2015_parse_properties(struct cw_battery *cw_bat) return ret; } + cw_bat->dual_cell = device_property_read_bool(dev, "cellwise,dual-cell"); + ret = device_property_read_u32(dev, "cellwise,monitor-interval-ms", &cw_bat->poll_interval_ms); if (ret) {