On Fri, Jun 9, 2023 at 4:58 PM AngeloGioacchino Del Regno <angelogioacchino.delregno@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Il 09/06/23 10:30, Chen-Yu Tsai ha scritto: > > The VCN33_BT and VCN33_WIFI regulators are actually the same regulator, > > having the same voltage setting and output pin. There are simply two > > enable bits that are ORed together to enable the regulator. > > > > Having two regulators representing the same output pin is misleading > > from a design matching standpoint, and also error-prone in driver > > implementations. If consumers try to set different voltages on either > > regulator, the one set later would override the one set before. There > > are ways around this, such as chaining them together and having the > > downstream one act as a switch. But given there's only one output pin, > > such a workaround doesn't match reality. > > > > Remove the VCN33_WIFI regulator. During the probe phase, have the driver > > sync the enable status of VCN33_WIFI to VCN33_BT. Also drop the suffix > > so that the regulator name matches the pin name in the datasheet. > > > > Signed-off-by: Chen-Yu Tsai <wenst@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > drivers/regulator/mt6358-regulator.c | 65 +++++++++++++++++----- > > include/linux/regulator/mt6358-regulator.h | 6 +- > > 2 files changed, 52 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/regulator/mt6358-regulator.c b/drivers/regulator/mt6358-regulator.c > > index c9e16bd092f6..faf6b0757019 100644 > > --- a/drivers/regulator/mt6358-regulator.c > > +++ b/drivers/regulator/mt6358-regulator.c > > @@ -277,7 +277,7 @@ static const unsigned int vcama_voltages[] = { > > 2800000, 2900000, 3000000, > > }; > > > > -static const unsigned int vcn33_bt_wifi_voltages[] = { > > +static const unsigned int vcn33_voltages[] = { > > 3300000, 3400000, 3500000, > > }; > > > > @@ -321,7 +321,7 @@ static const u32 vcama_idx[] = { > > 0, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, > > }; > > > > -static const u32 vcn33_bt_wifi_idx[] = { > > +static const u32 vcn33_idx[] = { > > 1, 2, 3, > > }; > > > > @@ -566,12 +566,8 @@ static struct mt6358_regulator_info mt6358_regulators[] = { > > MT6358_LDO_VCAMA1_CON0, 0, MT6358_VCAMA1_ANA_CON0, 0xf00), > > MT6358_LDO("ldo_vemc", VEMC, vmch_vemc_voltages, vmch_vemc_idx, > > MT6358_LDO_VEMC_CON0, 0, MT6358_VEMC_ANA_CON0, 0x700), > > - MT6358_LDO("ldo_vcn33_bt", VCN33_BT, vcn33_bt_wifi_voltages, > > - vcn33_bt_wifi_idx, MT6358_LDO_VCN33_CON0_0, > > - 0, MT6358_VCN33_ANA_CON0, 0x300), > > - MT6358_LDO("ldo_vcn33_wifi", VCN33_WIFI, vcn33_bt_wifi_voltages, > > - vcn33_bt_wifi_idx, MT6358_LDO_VCN33_CON0_1, > > - 0, MT6358_VCN33_ANA_CON0, 0x300), > > + MT6358_LDO("ldo_vcn33", VCN33, vcn33_voltages, vcn33_idx, > > + MT6358_LDO_VCN33_CON0_0, 0, MT6358_VCN33_ANA_CON0, 0x300), > > MT6358_LDO("ldo_vcama2", VCAMA2, vcama_voltages, vcama_idx, > > MT6358_LDO_VCAMA2_CON0, 0, MT6358_VCAMA2_ANA_CON0, 0xf00), > > MT6358_LDO("ldo_vmc", VMC, vmc_voltages, vmc_idx, > > @@ -662,12 +658,8 @@ static struct mt6358_regulator_info mt6366_regulators[] = { > > MT6358_LDO_VMCH_CON0, 0, MT6358_VMCH_ANA_CON0, 0x700), > > MT6366_LDO("ldo_vemc", VEMC, vmch_vemc_voltages, vmch_vemc_idx, > > MT6358_LDO_VEMC_CON0, 0, MT6358_VEMC_ANA_CON0, 0x700), > > - MT6366_LDO("ldo_vcn33_bt", VCN33_BT, vcn33_bt_wifi_voltages, > > - vcn33_bt_wifi_idx, MT6358_LDO_VCN33_CON0_0, > > - 0, MT6358_VCN33_ANA_CON0, 0x300), > > - MT6366_LDO("ldo_vcn33_wifi", VCN33_WIFI, vcn33_bt_wifi_voltages, > > - vcn33_bt_wifi_idx, MT6358_LDO_VCN33_CON0_1, > > - 0, MT6358_VCN33_ANA_CON0, 0x300), > > + MT6366_LDO("ldo_vcn33", VCN33, vcn33_voltages, vcn33_idx, > > + MT6358_LDO_VCN33_CON0_0, 0, MT6358_VCN33_ANA_CON0, 0x300), > > MT6366_LDO("ldo_vmc", VMC, vmc_voltages, vmc_idx, > > MT6358_LDO_VMC_CON0, 0, MT6358_VMC_ANA_CON0, 0xf00), > > MT6366_LDO("ldo_vsim2", VSIM2, vsim_voltages, vsim_idx, > > @@ -690,13 +682,56 @@ static struct mt6358_regulator_info mt6366_regulators[] = { > > MT6358_LDO_VSRAM_CON1, 0x7f), > > }; > > > > +static int mt6358_sync_vcn33_setting(struct device *dev) > > +{ > > + struct mt6397_chip *mt6397 = dev_get_drvdata(dev->parent); > > + unsigned int val; > > + int ret; > > + > > + /* > > + * VCN33_WIFI and VCN33_BT are two separate enable bits for the same > > + * regulator. They share the same voltage setting and output pin. > > + * Instead of having two potentially conflicting regulators, just have > > + * one VCN33 regulator. Sync the two enable bits and only use one in > > + * the regulator device. > > + */ > > + ret = regmap_read(mt6397->regmap, MT6358_LDO_VCN33_CON0_1, &val); > > + if (ret) { > > + dev_err(dev, "Failed to read VCN33_WIFI setting\n"); > > + return ret; > > + } > > + > > + if (!(val & BIT(0))) > > + return 0; > > + > > + /* Sync VCN33_WIFI enable status to VCN33_BT */ > > + ret = regmap_update_bits(mt6397->regmap, MT6358_LDO_VCN33_CON0_0, BIT(0), BIT(0)); > > + if (ret) { > > + dev_err(dev, "Failed to sync VCN33_WIFI setting to VCN33_BT\n"); > > + return ret; > > + } > > + > > + /* Disable VCN33_WIFI */ > > + ret = regmap_update_bits(mt6397->regmap, MT6358_LDO_VCN33_CON0_1, BIT(0), 0); > > + if (ret) { > > + dev_err(dev, "Failed to disable VCN33_BT\n"); > > + return ret; > > + } > > + > > + return 0; > > +} > > + > > static int mt6358_regulator_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > > { > > struct mt6397_chip *mt6397 = dev_get_drvdata(pdev->dev.parent); > > struct regulator_config config = {}; > > struct regulator_dev *rdev; > > struct mt6358_regulator_info *mt6358_info; > > - int i, max_regulator; > > + int i, max_regulator, ret; > > + > > + ret = mt6358_sync_vcn33_setting(&pdev->dev); > > + if (ret) > > + return ret; > > I'd put this after the chip_id check, and I would also add a safety check for > that... > > switch (mt6397->chip_id) { > case MT6366_CHIP_ID: > max_regulator = MT6366_MAX_REGULATOR; > mt6358_info = mt6366_regulators; > break; > case MT6358_CHIP_ID: > max_regulator = MT6358_MAX_REGULATOR; > mt6358_info = mt6358_regulators; > break; > default: > return -EINVAL; > } > > ret = mt6358_sync_vcn33_setting(....) Sounds good. We wouldn't want to be poking random bits in some other PMIC. > ...but I agree with your point here about this being a strange design and > also with your way of fixing the driver. What I heard was that they support separate Bluetooth and WiFi drivers that don't have a common reference counting framework for their regulator supplies using this scheme. Maybe they are doing the power sequencing in some small firmware. ChenYu