On 6/13/2019 10:34 PM, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
On Wed 12 Jun 04:00 PDT 2019, Nisha Kumari wrote:
This patch adds labibb regulator driver for supporting LCD mode display
on SDM845 platform.
Signed-off-by: Nisha Kumari <nishakumari@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/regulator/Kconfig | 10 +
drivers/regulator/Makefile | 1 +
drivers/regulator/qcom-labibb-regulator.c | 438 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
3 files changed, 449 insertions(+)
create mode 100644 drivers/regulator/qcom-labibb-regulator.c
diff --git a/drivers/regulator/Kconfig b/drivers/regulator/Kconfig
index b7f249e..ab9d272 100644
--- a/drivers/regulator/Kconfig
+++ b/drivers/regulator/Kconfig
@@ -1057,5 +1057,15 @@ config REGULATOR_WM8994
This driver provides support for the voltage regulators on the
WM8994 CODEC.
+config REGULATOR_QCOM_LABIBB
+ tristate "QCOM LAB/IBB regulator support"
+ depends on SPMI || COMPILE_TEST
+ help
+ This driver supports Qualcomm's LAB/IBB regulators present on the
+ Qualcomm's PMIC chip pmi8998. QCOM LAB and IBB are SPMI
+ based PMIC implementations. LAB can be used as positive
+ boost regulator and IBB can be used as a negative boost regulator
+ for LCD display panel.
+
endif
diff --git a/drivers/regulator/Makefile b/drivers/regulator/Makefile
index 1169f8a..f123f3e 100644
--- a/drivers/regulator/Makefile
+++ b/drivers/regulator/Makefile
@@ -81,6 +81,7 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_REGULATOR_MT6311) += mt6311-regulator.o
obj-$(CONFIG_REGULATOR_MT6323) += mt6323-regulator.o
obj-$(CONFIG_REGULATOR_MT6380) += mt6380-regulator.o
obj-$(CONFIG_REGULATOR_MT6397) += mt6397-regulator.o
+obj-$(CONFIG_REGULATOR_QCOM_LABIBB) += qcom-labibb-regulator.o
obj-$(CONFIG_REGULATOR_QCOM_RPM) += qcom_rpm-regulator.o
obj-$(CONFIG_REGULATOR_QCOM_RPMH) += qcom-rpmh-regulator.o
obj-$(CONFIG_REGULATOR_QCOM_SMD_RPM) += qcom_smd-regulator.o
diff --git a/drivers/regulator/qcom-labibb-regulator.c b/drivers/regulator/qcom-labibb-regulator.c
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..0c68883
--- /dev/null
+++ b/drivers/regulator/qcom-labibb-regulator.c
@@ -0,0 +1,438 @@
+// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
+// Copyright (c) 2019, The Linux Foundation. All rights reserved.
+
+#include <linux/module.h>
+#include <linux/of_irq.h>
+#include <linux/platform_device.h>
+#include <linux/regmap.h>
+#include <linux/regulator/driver.h>
+#include <linux/regulator/of_regulator.h>
+
+#define REG_PERPH_TYPE 0x04
+#define QCOM_LAB_TYPE 0x24
+#define QCOM_IBB_TYPE 0x20
+
+#define REG_LAB_STATUS1 0x08
+#define REG_LAB_ENABLE_CTL 0x46
+#define LAB_STATUS1_VREG_OK_BIT BIT(7)
+#define LAB_ENABLE_CTL_EN BIT(7)
+
+#define REG_IBB_STATUS1 0x08
+#define REG_IBB_ENABLE_CTL 0x46
+#define IBB_STATUS1_VREG_OK_BIT BIT(7)
+#define IBB_ENABLE_CTL_MASK (BIT(7) | BIT(6))
+#define IBB_CONTROL_ENABLE BIT(7)
+
+#define POWER_DELAY 8000
+
+struct lab_regulator {
+ struct regulator_dev *rdev;
+ int vreg_enabled;
+};
+
+struct ibb_regulator {
+ struct regulator_dev *rdev;
+ int vreg_enabled;
+};
+
+struct qcom_labibb {
+ struct device *dev;
+ struct regmap *regmap;
+ u16 lab_base;
+ u16 ibb_base;
+ struct lab_regulator lab_vreg;
+ struct ibb_regulator ibb_vreg;
+};
+
+static int qcom_labibb_read(struct qcom_labibb *labibb, u16 address,
These three wrappers are essentially just aliases of the regmap
functions, with an error print. In all call sights you check for errors
and print another error. So they don't reduce the amount of code at the
callers and they simply means that any error result in two prints in the
log.
Please drop these three wrappers and just call the regmap functions
directly.
Sure, i will do that.
+ u8 *val, int count)
+{
+ int ret;
+
+ ret = regmap_bulk_read(labibb->regmap, address, val, count);
+ if (ret < 0)
+ dev_err(labibb->dev, "spmi read failed ret=%d\n", ret);
+
+ return ret;
+}
+
+static int qcom_labibb_write(struct qcom_labibb *labibb, u16 address,
+ u8 *val, int count)
+{
+ int ret;
+
+ ret = regmap_bulk_write(labibb->regmap, address, val, count);
+ if (ret < 0)
+ dev_err(labibb->dev, "spmi write failed: ret=%d\n", ret);
+
+ return ret;
+}
+
+static int qcom_labibb_masked_write(struct qcom_labibb *labibb, u16 address,
+ u8 mask, u8 val)
+{
+ int ret;
+
+ ret = regmap_update_bits(labibb->regmap, address, mask, val);
+ if (ret < 0)
+ dev_err(labibb->dev, "spmi write failed: ret=%d\n", ret);
+
+ return ret;
+}
+
+static int qcom_enable_ibb(struct qcom_labibb *labibb, bool enable)
+{
+ int ret;
+ u8 val = enable ? IBB_CONTROL_ENABLE : 0;
+
+ ret = qcom_labibb_masked_write(labibb,
+ labibb->ibb_base + REG_IBB_ENABLE_CTL,
+ IBB_ENABLE_CTL_MASK, val);
+ if (ret < 0)
+ dev_err(labibb->dev, "Unable to configure IBB_ENABLE_CTL ret=%d\n",
+ ret);
+
+ return ret;
+}
+
+static int qcom_lab_regulator_enable(struct regulator_dev *rdev)
+{
+ int ret;
+ u8 val;
+ struct qcom_labibb *labibb = rdev_get_drvdata(rdev);
+
+ val = LAB_ENABLE_CTL_EN;
+ ret = qcom_labibb_write(labibb,
+ labibb->lab_base + REG_LAB_ENABLE_CTL,
+ &val, 1);
+ if (ret < 0) {
+ dev_err(labibb->dev, "Write register failed ret = %d\n", ret);
+ return ret;
+ }
+
+ /* Wait for a small period before reading REG_LAB_STATUS1 */
+ usleep_range(POWER_DELAY, POWER_DELAY + 100);
Wait between 8 and 8.1ms? How about giving the scheduler some more slack
and making that +100 larger?
Ok,i will add.
+
+ ret = qcom_labibb_read(labibb, labibb->lab_base +
+ REG_LAB_STATUS1, &val, 1);
+ if (ret < 0) {
+ dev_err(labibb->dev, "Read register failed ret = %d\n", ret);
+ return ret;
+ }
+
+ if (!(val & LAB_STATUS1_VREG_OK_BIT)) {
+ dev_err(labibb->dev, "Can't enable LAB\n");
+ return -EINVAL;
+ }
+
+ labibb->lab_vreg.vreg_enabled = 1;
You don't use vreg_enabled in this patch, how about adding it in the
next patch where it's actually used instead.
Sure, i will do that.
+
+ return 0;
+}
+
+static int qcom_lab_regulator_disable(struct regulator_dev *rdev)
+{
+ int ret;
+ u8 val = 0;
+ struct qcom_labibb *labibb = rdev_get_drvdata(rdev);
+
+ ret = qcom_labibb_write(labibb,
+ labibb->lab_base + REG_LAB_ENABLE_CTL,
+ &val, 1);
+ if (ret < 0) {
+ dev_err(labibb->dev, "Write register failed ret = %d\n", ret);
+ return ret;
+ }
+ /* after this delay, lab should get disabled */
+ usleep_range(POWER_DELAY, POWER_DELAY + 100);
+
+ ret = qcom_labibb_read(labibb, labibb->lab_base +
+ REG_LAB_STATUS1, &val, 1);
+ if (ret < 0) {
+ dev_err(labibb->dev, "Read register failed ret = %d\n", ret);
+ return ret;
+ }
+
+ if (val & LAB_STATUS1_VREG_OK_BIT) {
+ dev_err(labibb->dev, "Can't disable LAB\n");
+ return -EINVAL;
+ }
+
+ labibb->lab_vreg.vreg_enabled = 0;
+
disable is pretty much identical to enable, so might be worth moving its
content to a common helper function and calling that from the two.
Sure, i will do that.
+ return 0;
+}
+
+static int qcom_lab_regulator_is_enabled(struct regulator_dev *rdev)
+{
+ int ret;
+ u8 val;
+ struct qcom_labibb *labibb = rdev_get_drvdata(rdev);
+
+ ret = qcom_labibb_read(labibb, labibb->lab_base +
+ REG_LAB_STATUS1, &val, 1);
+ if (ret < 0) {
+ dev_err(labibb->dev, "Read register failed ret = %d\n", ret);
+ return ret;
+ }
+
+ return val & LAB_STATUS1_VREG_OK_BIT;
+}
+
+static struct regulator_ops qcom_lab_ops = {
+ .enable = qcom_lab_regulator_enable,
+ .disable = qcom_lab_regulator_disable,
+ .is_enabled = qcom_lab_regulator_is_enabled,
+};
+
+static const struct regulator_desc lab_desc = {
+ .name = "lab_reg",
+ .ops = &qcom_lab_ops,
+ .type = REGULATOR_VOLTAGE,
+ .owner = THIS_MODULE,
+};
+
+static int qcom_ibb_regulator_enable(struct regulator_dev *rdev)
+{
+ int ret, retries = 10;
+ u8 val;
+ struct qcom_labibb *labibb = rdev_get_drvdata(rdev);
+
+ ret = qcom_enable_ibb(labibb, 1);
+ if (ret < 0) {
+ dev_err(labibb->dev, "Unable to set IBB mode ret= %d\n", ret);
+ return ret;
+ }
+
+ while (retries--) {
Is there a reason why would don't want this wait for the "lab"? That
should allow you to use the same functions for both regulators.
No. LAB comes up in only one try. But there is no harm in using multiple
retries. So i will do that.
+ /* Wait for a small period before reading IBB_STATUS1 */
+ usleep_range(POWER_DELAY, POWER_DELAY + 100);
+
+ ret = qcom_labibb_read(labibb, labibb->ibb_base +
+ REG_IBB_STATUS1, &val, 1);
+ if (ret < 0) {
+ dev_err(labibb->dev,
+ "Read register failed ret = %d\n", ret);
+ return ret;
+ }
+
+ if (val & IBB_STATUS1_VREG_OK_BIT) {
+ labibb->ibb_vreg.vreg_enabled = 1;
+ return 0;
+ }
+ }
+
+ dev_err(labibb->dev, "Can't enable IBB\n");
+ return -EINVAL;
+}
+
+static int qcom_ibb_regulator_disable(struct regulator_dev *rdev)
+{
+ int ret, retries = 2;
+ u8 val;
+ struct qcom_labibb *labibb = rdev_get_drvdata(rdev);
+
+ ret = qcom_enable_ibb(labibb, 0);
+ if (ret < 0) {
+ dev_err(labibb->dev,
+ "Unable to set IBB_MODULE_EN ret = %d\n", ret);
+ return ret;
+ }
+
+ /* poll IBB_STATUS to make sure ibb had been disabled */
+ while (retries--) {
+ usleep_range(POWER_DELAY, POWER_DELAY + 100);
+ ret = qcom_labibb_read(labibb, labibb->ibb_base +
+ REG_IBB_STATUS1, &val, 1);
+ if (ret < 0) {
+ dev_err(labibb->dev, "Read register failed ret = %d\n",
+ ret);
+ return ret;
+ }
+
+ if (!(val & IBB_STATUS1_VREG_OK_BIT)) {
+ labibb->ibb_vreg.vreg_enabled = 0;
+ return 0;
+ }
+ }
+ dev_err(labibb->dev, "Can't disable IBB\n");
+ return -EINVAL;
+}
+
+static int qcom_ibb_regulator_is_enabled(struct regulator_dev *rdev)
+{
+ int ret;
+ u8 val;
+ struct qcom_labibb *labibb = rdev_get_drvdata(rdev);
+
+ ret = qcom_labibb_read(labibb, labibb->ibb_base +
+ REG_IBB_STATUS1, &val, 1);
+ if (ret < 0) {
+ dev_err(labibb->dev, "Read register failed ret = %d\n", ret);
+ return ret;
+ }
+
+ return(val & IBB_STATUS1_VREG_OK_BIT);
+}
+
+static struct regulator_ops qcom_ibb_ops = {
+ .enable = qcom_ibb_regulator_enable,
+ .disable = qcom_ibb_regulator_disable,
+ .is_enabled = qcom_ibb_regulator_is_enabled,
+};
+
+static const struct regulator_desc ibb_desc = {
+ .name = "ibb_reg",
+ .ops = &qcom_ibb_ops,
+ .type = REGULATOR_VOLTAGE,
+ .owner = THIS_MODULE,
+};
+
+static int register_lab_regulator(struct qcom_labibb *labibb,
+ struct device_node *of_node)
+{
+ int ret = 0;
+ struct regulator_init_data *init_data;
+ struct regulator_config cfg = {};
+
+ cfg.dev = labibb->dev;
+ cfg.driver_data = labibb;
+ cfg.of_node = of_node;
+ init_data =
+ of_get_regulator_init_data(labibb->dev,
+ of_node, &lab_desc);
Rather than calling of_get_regulator_init_data() directly, you should
use desc->of_match to match the children of the regulator driver.
Sure, i will do that.
+ if (!init_data) {
+ dev_err(labibb->dev,
+ "unable to get init data for LAB\n");
+ return -ENOMEM;
+ }
+ cfg.init_data = init_data;
+
+ labibb->lab_vreg.rdev = devm_regulator_register(labibb->dev, &lab_desc,
+ &cfg);
+ if (IS_ERR(labibb->lab_vreg.rdev)) {
+ ret = PTR_ERR(labibb->lab_vreg.rdev);
+ dev_err(labibb->dev,
+ "unable to register LAB regulator");
+ return ret;
+ }
+ return 0;
+}
+
+static int register_ibb_regulator(struct qcom_labibb *labibb,
+ struct device_node *of_node)
+{
+ int ret;
+ struct regulator_init_data *init_data;
+ struct regulator_config cfg = {};
+
+ cfg.dev = labibb->dev;
+ cfg.driver_data = labibb;
+ cfg.of_node = of_node;
+ init_data =
+ of_get_regulator_init_data(labibb->dev,
+ of_node, &ibb_desc);
+ if (!init_data) {
+ dev_err(labibb->dev,
+ "unable to get init data for IBB\n");
+ return -ENOMEM;
+ }
+ cfg.init_data = init_data;
+
+ labibb->ibb_vreg.rdev = devm_regulator_register(labibb->dev, &ibb_desc,
+ &cfg);
+ if (IS_ERR(labibb->ibb_vreg.rdev)) {
+ ret = PTR_ERR(labibb->ibb_vreg.rdev);
+ dev_err(labibb->dev,
+ "unable to register IBB regulator");
+ return ret;
+ }
+ return 0;
+}
+
+static int qcom_labibb_regulator_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
+{
+ struct qcom_labibb *labibb;
+ struct device_node *child;
+ unsigned int base;
+ u8 type;
+ int ret;
+
+ labibb = devm_kzalloc(&pdev->dev, sizeof(*labibb), GFP_KERNEL);
+ if (!labibb)
+ return -ENOMEM;
+
+ labibb->regmap = dev_get_regmap(pdev->dev.parent, NULL);
+ if (!labibb->regmap) {
+ dev_err(&pdev->dev, "Couldn't get parent's regmap\n");
+ return -ENODEV;
+ }
+
+ labibb->dev = &pdev->dev;
+
+ for_each_available_child_of_node(pdev->dev.of_node, child) {
+ ret = of_property_read_u32(child, "reg", &base);
+ if (ret < 0) {
+ dev_err(&pdev->dev,
+ "Couldn't find reg in node = %s ret = %d\n",
+ child->full_name, ret);
+ return ret;
+ }
+
+ ret = qcom_labibb_read(labibb, base + REG_PERPH_TYPE,
+ &type, 1);
+ if (ret < 0) {
+ dev_err(labibb->dev,
+ "Peripheral type read failed ret=%d\n",
+ ret);
+ }
+
+ switch (type) {
+ case QCOM_LAB_TYPE:
+ labibb->lab_base = base;
+ ret = register_lab_regulator(labibb, child);
+ if (ret < 0) {
+ dev_err(labibb->dev,
+ "Failed LAB regulator registration");
+ return ret;
+ }
+ break;
+
+ case QCOM_IBB_TYPE:
+ labibb->ibb_base = base;
+ ret = register_ibb_regulator(labibb, child);
+ if (ret < 0) {
+ dev_err(labibb->dev,
+ "Failed IBB regulator registration");
+ return ret;
+ }
+ break;
+
+ default:
+ dev_err(labibb->dev,
+ "qcom_labibb: unknown peripheral type\n");
+ return -EINVAL;
+ }
+ }
Given how the registers are laid out, the accessors looks like and this
loop I think that rather than having a "virtual" labibb device you
should instantiate two devices directly.
Sure, i will do that.
+
+ dev_set_drvdata(&pdev->dev, labibb);
+ return 0;
+}
+
+static const struct of_device_id qcom_labibb_match_table[] = {
+ { .compatible = "qcom,lab-ibb-regulator", },
So please make this qcom,pmi8998-lab and qcom,pmi8998-ibb.
Yeah
Regards,
Bjorn
Thanks and regards,
Nisha
+ { },
+};
+MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, qcom_labibb_match_table);
+
+static struct platform_driver qcom_labibb_regulator_driver = {
+ .driver = {
+ .name = "qcom-lab-ibb-regulator",
+ .of_match_table = qcom_labibb_match_table,
+ },
+ .probe = qcom_labibb_regulator_probe,
+};
+module_platform_driver(qcom_labibb_regulator_driver);
+
+MODULE_DESCRIPTION("Qualcomm labibb driver");
+MODULE_LICENSE("GPL v2");
--
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project
