Re: [PATCH v2 4/4] thermal: mediatek: add another get_temp ops for thermal sensors

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Le 20/07/2022 à 20:18, Amjad Ouled-Ameur a écrit :
Provide thermal zone to read thermal sensor in the SoC. We can read all the
thermal sensors value in the SoC by the node /sys/class/thermal/

In mtk_thermal_bank_temperature, return -EAGAIN instead of -EACCESS
on the first read of sensor that often are bogus values.
This can avoid following warning on boot:

   thermal thermal_zone6: failed to read out thermal zone (-13)

Signed-off-by: default avatarMichael Kao <michael.kao-NuS5LvNUpcJWk0Htik3J/w@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: default avatarHsin-Yi Wang <hsinyi-F7+t8E8rja9g9hUCZPvPmw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Amjad Ouled-Ameur <aouledameur-rdvid1DuHRBWk0Htik3J/w@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Tested-by: Amjad Ouled-Ameur <aouledameur-rdvid1DuHRBWk0Htik3J/w@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
  drivers/thermal/mtk_thermal.c | 100 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------
  1 file changed, 76 insertions(+), 24 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/thermal/mtk_thermal.c b/drivers/thermal/mtk_thermal.c
index 1dc276f8c4f1..79b14ce1a08d 100644
--- a/drivers/thermal/mtk_thermal.c
+++ b/drivers/thermal/mtk_thermal.c
@@ -259,6 +259,11 @@ enum mtk_thermal_version {
struct mtk_thermal; +struct mtk_thermal_zone {
+	struct mtk_thermal *mt;
+	int id;
+};
+
  struct thermal_bank_cfg {
  	unsigned int num_sensors;
  	const int *sensors;
@@ -709,6 +714,32 @@ static void mtk_thermal_put_bank(struct mtk_thermal_bank *bank)
  		mutex_unlock(&mt->lock);
  }
+static u32 _get_sensor_temp(struct mtk_thermal *mt, int id)
+{
+	u32 raw;
+	int temp;
+
+	const struct mtk_thermal_data *conf = mt->conf;
+
+	raw = readl(mt->thermal_base + conf->msr[id]);
+
+	if (mt->conf->version == MTK_THERMAL_V1)
+		temp = raw_to_mcelsius_v1(mt, id, raw);
+	else
+		temp = raw_to_mcelsius_v2(mt, id, raw);
+
+	/*
+	 * The first read of a sensor often contains very high bogus
+	 * temperature value. Filter these out so that the system does
+	 * not immediately shut down.
+	 */
+
+	if (temp > 200000)
+		return  -EAGAIN;

This function returns a u32. Is it ok to return -EAGAIN?

There is also 2 spaces here...

+	else
+		return	temp;

... and a tab here.

+}
+
  /**
   * mtk_thermal_bank_temperature - get the temperature of a bank
   * @bank:	The bank
@@ -721,26 +752,9 @@ static int mtk_thermal_bank_temperature(struct mtk_thermal_bank *bank)
  	struct mtk_thermal *mt = bank->mt;
  	const struct mtk_thermal_data *conf = mt->conf;
  	int i, temp = INT_MIN, max = INT_MIN;
-	u32 raw;
for (i = 0; i < conf->bank_data[bank->id].num_sensors; i++) {
-		raw = readl(mt->thermal_base + conf->msr[i]);
-
-		if (mt->conf->version == MTK_THERMAL_V1) {
-			temp = raw_to_mcelsius_v1(
-				mt, conf->bank_data[bank->id].sensors[i], raw);
-		} else {
-			temp = raw_to_mcelsius_v2(
-				mt, conf->bank_data[bank->id].sensors[i], raw);
-		}
-
-		/*
-		 * The first read of a sensor often contains very high bogus
-		 * temperature value. Filter these out so that the system does
-		 * not immediately shut down.
-		 */
-		if (temp > 200000)
-			temp = 0;
+		temp = _get_sensor_temp(mt, i);

Is it ok if _get_sensor_temp() returns -EAGAIN?

if (temp > max)
  			max = temp;
@@ -751,7 +765,8 @@ static int mtk_thermal_bank_temperature(struct mtk_thermal_bank *bank)
static int mtk_read_temp(void *data, int *temperature)
  {
-	struct mtk_thermal *mt = data;
+	struct mtk_thermal_zone *tz = data;
+	struct mtk_thermal *mt = tz->mt;
  	int i;
  	int tempmax = INT_MIN;
@@ -770,10 +785,28 @@ static int mtk_read_temp(void *data, int *temperature)
  	return 0;
  }
+static int mtk_read_sensor_temp(void *data, int *temperature)
+{
+	struct mtk_thermal_zone *tz = data;
+	struct mtk_thermal *mt = tz->mt;
+	int id = tz->id - 1;
+
+	if (id < 0)
+		return  -EACCES;

2 spaces.

+
+	*temperature = _get_sensor_temp(mt, id);

If _get_sensor_temp() returns -EAGAIN, should this be propagated to the caller?

+
+	return 0;
+}
+
  static const struct thermal_zone_of_device_ops mtk_thermal_ops = {
  	.get_temp = mtk_read_temp,
  };
+static const struct thermal_zone_of_device_ops mtk_thermal_sensor_ops = {
+	.get_temp = mtk_read_sensor_temp,
+};
+
  static void mtk_thermal_init_bank(struct mtk_thermal *mt, int num,
  				  u32 apmixed_phys_base, u32 auxadc_phys_base,
  				  int ctrl_id)
@@ -1072,6 +1105,7 @@ static int mtk_thermal_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
  	u64 auxadc_phys_base, apmixed_phys_base;
  	struct thermal_zone_device *tzdev;
  	void __iomem *apmixed_base, *auxadc_base;
+	struct mtk_thermal_zone *tz;
mt = devm_kzalloc(&pdev->dev, sizeof(*mt), GFP_KERNEL);
  	if (!mt)
@@ -1161,11 +1195,29 @@ static int mtk_thermal_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
platform_set_drvdata(pdev, mt); - tzdev = devm_thermal_zone_of_sensor_register(&pdev->dev, 0, mt,
-						     &mtk_thermal_ops);
-	if (IS_ERR(tzdev)) {
-		ret = PTR_ERR(tzdev);
-		goto err_disable_clk_peri_therm;
+	for (i = 0; i < mt->conf->num_sensors + 1; i++) {
+		tz = kmalloc(sizeof(*tz), GFP_KERNEL);

Should this memory allocation be a devm_kmalloc(), or is this memory freed at some point by the framework?

(I don't know the thermal_zone API and the patch has no kfree())

CJ

+		if (!tz)
+			return -ENOMEM;
+
+		tz->mt = mt;
+		tz->id = i;
+
+		tzdev = devm_thermal_zone_of_sensor_register(&pdev->dev, i, tz, (i == 0) ?
+							     &mtk_thermal_ops :
+							     &mtk_thermal_sensor_ops);
+
+		if (IS_ERR(tzdev)) {
+			if (PTR_ERR(tzdev) == -ENODEV) {
+				dev_warn(&pdev->dev,
+					 "sensor %d not registered in thermal zone in dt\n", i);
+				continue;
+			}
+			if (PTR_ERR(tzdev) == -EACCES) {
+				ret = PTR_ERR(tzdev);
+				goto err_disable_clk_peri_therm;
+			}
+		}
  	}
ret = devm_thermal_add_hwmon_sysfs(tzdev);




[Index of Archives]     [Device Tree Compilter]     [Device Tree Spec]     [Linux Driver Backports]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux PCI Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]     [Yosemite Backpacking]


  Powered by Linux