| Message ID | 1416553911-22990-4-git-send-email-aaron.lu@intel.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Changes Requested, archived |
| Headers | show |
On Friday, November 21, 2014 03:11:51 PM Aaron Lu wrote: > The same virtual GPIO strategy is also used for the AXP288 PMIC in that > various control methods that are used to do power rail handling and > sensor reading/setting will touch GPIO fields defined under the PMIC > device. The GPIO fileds are only defined by the ACPI code while the > actual hardware doesn't really have a GPIO controller, but to make those > control method execution succeed, we have to install a GPIO handler for > the PMIC device handle. Since we do not need the virtual GPIO strategy, > we can simply do nothing in that handler. > > Signed-off-by: Aaron Lu <aaron.lu@intel.com> > --- > drivers/acpi/pmic/intel_pmic_xpower.c | 27 +++++++++++++++++++++++---- > 1 file changed, 23 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/acpi/pmic/intel_pmic_xpower.c b/drivers/acpi/pmic/intel_pmic_xpower.c > index 6c4d6ce0cff1..480c41c36444 100644 > --- a/drivers/acpi/pmic/intel_pmic_xpower.c > +++ b/drivers/acpi/pmic/intel_pmic_xpower.c > @@ -251,13 +251,32 @@ static struct intel_pmic_opregion_data intel_xpower_pmic_opregion_data = { > .thermal_table_count = ARRAY_SIZE(thermal_table), > }; > > +static acpi_status intel_xpower_pmic_gpio_handler(u32 function, > + acpi_physical_address address, u32 bit_width, u64 *value, > + void *handler_context, void *region_context) > +{ > + return AE_OK; > +} > > static int intel_xpower_pmic_opregion_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > { > - struct axp20x_dev *axp20x = dev_get_drvdata(pdev->dev.parent); > - return intel_pmic_install_opregion_handler(&pdev->dev, > - ACPI_HANDLE(pdev->dev.parent), axp20x->regmap, > - &intel_xpower_pmic_opregion_data); > + struct device *parent = pdev->dev.parent; > + struct axp20x_dev *axp20x = dev_get_drvdata(parent); > + acpi_status status; > + int result; > + > + result = intel_pmic_install_opregion_handler(&pdev->dev, > + ACPI_HANDLE(parent), axp20x->regmap, > + &intel_xpower_pmic_opregion_data); > + if (!result) { > + status = acpi_install_address_space_handler( > + ACPI_HANDLE(parent), ACPI_ADR_SPACE_GPIO, > + intel_xpower_pmic_gpio_handler, NULL, NULL); So here we have a problem, because we can't unregister the opregion handler registered above if this fails. Not nice. > + if (ACPI_FAILURE(status)) > + result = -ENODEV; > + } > + > + return result; > } > > static struct platform_driver intel_xpower_pmic_opregion_driver = { >
On 11/24/2014 09:06 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Friday, November 21, 2014 03:11:51 PM Aaron Lu wrote: >> The same virtual GPIO strategy is also used for the AXP288 PMIC in that >> various control methods that are used to do power rail handling and >> sensor reading/setting will touch GPIO fields defined under the PMIC >> device. The GPIO fileds are only defined by the ACPI code while the >> actual hardware doesn't really have a GPIO controller, but to make those >> control method execution succeed, we have to install a GPIO handler for >> the PMIC device handle. Since we do not need the virtual GPIO strategy, >> we can simply do nothing in that handler. >> >> Signed-off-by: Aaron Lu <aaron.lu@intel.com> >> --- >> drivers/acpi/pmic/intel_pmic_xpower.c | 27 +++++++++++++++++++++++---- >> 1 file changed, 23 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/pmic/intel_pmic_xpower.c b/drivers/acpi/pmic/intel_pmic_xpower.c >> index 6c4d6ce0cff1..480c41c36444 100644 >> --- a/drivers/acpi/pmic/intel_pmic_xpower.c >> +++ b/drivers/acpi/pmic/intel_pmic_xpower.c >> @@ -251,13 +251,32 @@ static struct intel_pmic_opregion_data intel_xpower_pmic_opregion_data = { >> .thermal_table_count = ARRAY_SIZE(thermal_table), >> }; >> >> +static acpi_status intel_xpower_pmic_gpio_handler(u32 function, >> + acpi_physical_address address, u32 bit_width, u64 *value, >> + void *handler_context, void *region_context) >> +{ >> + return AE_OK; >> +} >> >> static int intel_xpower_pmic_opregion_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) >> { >> - struct axp20x_dev *axp20x = dev_get_drvdata(pdev->dev.parent); >> - return intel_pmic_install_opregion_handler(&pdev->dev, >> - ACPI_HANDLE(pdev->dev.parent), axp20x->regmap, >> - &intel_xpower_pmic_opregion_data); >> + struct device *parent = pdev->dev.parent; >> + struct axp20x_dev *axp20x = dev_get_drvdata(parent); >> + acpi_status status; >> + int result; >> + >> + result = intel_pmic_install_opregion_handler(&pdev->dev, >> + ACPI_HANDLE(parent), axp20x->regmap, >> + &intel_xpower_pmic_opregion_data); >> + if (!result) { >> + status = acpi_install_address_space_handler( >> + ACPI_HANDLE(parent), ACPI_ADR_SPACE_GPIO, >> + intel_xpower_pmic_gpio_handler, NULL, NULL); > > So here we have a problem, because we can't unregister the opregion handler > registered above if this fails. Not nice. I'll add a remove_opregion_handler call if the above install failed, the chance the remove_opregion_handler will trigger a problem during init time is pretty low. If that is not desired, I can install the operation region handler for the virtual GPIO first and then the real PMIC operation region handler, the cost of leaving a virtual GPIO operation region handler is essential zero I think. Thanks, Aaron > >> + if (ACPI_FAILURE(status)) >> + result = -ENODEV; >> + } >> + >> + return result; >> } >> >> static struct platform_driver intel_xpower_pmic_opregion_driver = { >> > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
diff --git a/drivers/acpi/pmic/intel_pmic_xpower.c b/drivers/acpi/pmic/intel_pmic_xpower.c index 6c4d6ce0cff1..480c41c36444 100644 --- a/drivers/acpi/pmic/intel_pmic_xpower.c +++ b/drivers/acpi/pmic/intel_pmic_xpower.c @@ -251,13 +251,32 @@ static struct intel_pmic_opregion_data intel_xpower_pmic_opregion_data = { .thermal_table_count = ARRAY_SIZE(thermal_table), }; +static acpi_status intel_xpower_pmic_gpio_handler(u32 function, + acpi_physical_address address, u32 bit_width, u64 *value, + void *handler_context, void *region_context) +{ + return AE_OK; +} static int intel_xpower_pmic_opregion_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) { - struct axp20x_dev *axp20x = dev_get_drvdata(pdev->dev.parent); - return intel_pmic_install_opregion_handler(&pdev->dev, - ACPI_HANDLE(pdev->dev.parent), axp20x->regmap, - &intel_xpower_pmic_opregion_data); + struct device *parent = pdev->dev.parent; + struct axp20x_dev *axp20x = dev_get_drvdata(parent); + acpi_status status; + int result; + + result = intel_pmic_install_opregion_handler(&pdev->dev, + ACPI_HANDLE(parent), axp20x->regmap, + &intel_xpower_pmic_opregion_data); + if (!result) { + status = acpi_install_address_space_handler( + ACPI_HANDLE(parent), ACPI_ADR_SPACE_GPIO, + intel_xpower_pmic_gpio_handler, NULL, NULL); + if (ACPI_FAILURE(status)) + result = -ENODEV; + } + + return result; } static struct platform_driver intel_xpower_pmic_opregion_driver = {
The same virtual GPIO strategy is also used for the AXP288 PMIC in that various control methods that are used to do power rail handling and sensor reading/setting will touch GPIO fields defined under the PMIC device. The GPIO fileds are only defined by the ACPI code while the actual hardware doesn't really have a GPIO controller, but to make those control method execution succeed, we have to install a GPIO handler for the PMIC device handle. Since we do not need the virtual GPIO strategy, we can simply do nothing in that handler. Signed-off-by: Aaron Lu <aaron.lu@intel.com> --- drivers/acpi/pmic/intel_pmic_xpower.c | 27 +++++++++++++++++++++++---- 1 file changed, 23 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)