On Mon, Jul 11 2022 at 15:34:23 +0200, Jacopo Mondi <jacopo@xxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Hello Yassine
On Mon, Jul 11, 2022 at 08:28:39AM +0400, Yassine Oudjana wrote:
From: Yassine Oudjana <y.oudjana@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Make the driver get needed regulators on probe and enable/disable
them on runtime PM callbacks.
Signed-off-by: Yassine Oudjana <y.oudjana@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/media/i2c/ak7375.c | 39
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1 file changed, 39 insertions(+)
diff --git a/drivers/media/i2c/ak7375.c b/drivers/media/i2c/ak7375.c
index 40b1a4aa846c..59d5cb00e3ba 100644
--- a/drivers/media/i2c/ak7375.c
+++ b/drivers/media/i2c/ak7375.c
@@ -6,6 +6,7 @@
#include <linux/i2c.h>
#include <linux/module.h>
#include <linux/pm_runtime.h>
+#include <linux/regulator/consumer.h>
#include <media/v4l2-ctrls.h>
#include <media/v4l2-device.h>
@@ -23,17 +24,32 @@
*/
#define AK7375_CTRL_STEPS 64
#define AK7375_CTRL_DELAY_US 1000
+/*
+ * The vcm takes around 3 ms to power on and start taking
+ * I2C messages. This value was found experimentally due to
+ * lack of documentation. 2 ms is added as a safety margin.
+ */
+#define AK7375_POWER_DELAY_US 5000
#define AK7375_REG_POSITION 0x0
#define AK7375_REG_CONT 0x2
#define AK7375_MODE_ACTIVE 0x0
#define AK7375_MODE_STANDBY 0x40
+static const char * const ak7375_supply_names[] = {
+ "vdd",
+ "vio",
+};
+
+#define AK7375_NUM_SUPPLIES ARRAY_SIZE(ak7375_supply_names)
+
/* ak7375 device structure */
struct ak7375_device {
struct v4l2_ctrl_handler ctrls_vcm;
struct v4l2_subdev sd;
struct v4l2_ctrl *focus;
+ struct regulator_bulk_data supplies[AK7375_NUM_SUPPLIES];
+
/* active or standby mode */
bool active;
};
@@ -132,6 +148,7 @@ static int ak7375_init_controls(struct
ak7375_device *dev_vcm)
static int ak7375_probe(struct i2c_client *client)
{
struct ak7375_device *ak7375_dev;
+ int i;
I would have moved this one down to maintain variable declaration
in the in-famous reverse-xmas-tree ordering. Up to you.
I'm used to declaring variables in the order of first use,
but I don't really mind it either way. I'll move it down.
int ret;
ak7375_dev = devm_kzalloc(&client->dev, sizeof(*ak7375_dev),
@@ -139,6 +156,17 @@ static int ak7375_probe(struct i2c_client
*client)
if (!ak7375_dev)
return -ENOMEM;
+ for (i = 0; i < AK7375_NUM_SUPPLIES; i++)
+ ak7375_dev->supplies[i].supply = ak7375_supply_names[i];
+
+ ret = devm_regulator_bulk_get(&client->dev, AK7375_NUM_SUPPLIES,
+ ak7375_dev->supplies);
+ if (ret) {
+ dev_err(&client->dev, "Failed to get regulators: %pe",
+ ERR_PTR(ret));
+ return ret;
+ }
+
v4l2_i2c_subdev_init(&ak7375_dev->sd, client, &ak7375_ops);
ak7375_dev->sd.flags |= V4L2_SUBDEV_FL_HAS_DEVNODE;
ak7375_dev->sd.internal_ops = &ak7375_int_ops;
@@ -210,6 +238,10 @@ static int __maybe_unused
ak7375_vcm_suspend(struct device *dev)
if (ret)
dev_err(dev, "%s I2C failure: %d\n", __func__, ret);
+ ret = regulator_bulk_disable(AK7375_NUM_SUPPLIES,
ak7375_dev->supplies);
+ if (ret)
+ return ret;
+
ak7375_dev->active = false;
return 0;
@@ -230,6 +262,13 @@ static int __maybe_unused
ak7375_vcm_resume(struct device *dev)
if (ak7375_dev->active)
return 0;
+ ret = regulator_bulk_enable(AK7375_NUM_SUPPLIES,
ak7375_dev->supplies);
+ if (ret)
+ return ret;
+
+ /* Wait for vcm to become ready */
+ usleep_range(AK7375_POWER_DELAY_US, AK7375_POWER_DELAY_US + 10);
+
Isn't 10usec a very small delay to be given to usleep_range() for a
delay of at least 3msec ? Also assuming 5msec just to be safe seems a
little arbitrary. Adding 2 milliseconds in the wakeup path introduces
a non-negligible delay.
I must admit that I didn't give it too much thought. I just
did it similar to the other delay used in this driver
(AK7375_CTRL_DELAY_US). As for adding 2ms, I don't know what
the worst case wake-up time is since I don't have a datasheet
on hand, so I just wanted to stay safe. Also, this driver
doesn't really recover if it fails to resume (which is what
used to happen before adding a delay). Rounding up to 5ms
felt good enough.
It's likely a detail, but according to
Documentation/timers/timers-howto.rst
Since usleep_range is built on top of hrtimers, the
wakeup will be very precise (ish), thus a simple
usleep function would likely introduce a large number
of undesired interrupts.
With the introduction of a range, the scheduler is
free to coalesce your wakeup with any other wakeup
that may have happened for other reasons, or at the
worst case, fire an interrupt for your upper bound.
The larger a range you supply, the greater a chance
that you will not trigger an interrupt; this should
be balanced with what is an acceptable upper bound on
delay / performance for your specific code path. Exact
tolerances here are very situation specific, thus it
is left to the caller to determine a reasonable range.
If you have a min of 3msec I would try with a range of (3000, 3500).
What do you think ?
Seems good. I haven't yet had it fail to power on within 3ms of
turning on regulators so I guess there is no reason to worry about it.
ret = ak7375_i2c_write(ak7375_dev, AK7375_REG_CONT,
AK7375_MODE_ACTIVE, 1);
if (ret) {
--
2.37.0
Thanks for the review,
Yassine
