On 11/21/23 14:50, AngeloGioacchino Del Regno wrote:
The t-calibration-data (SVS-Thermal calibration data) shall exist for
all SoCs or SVS won't work anyway: move it to the common svs_probe()
function and remove it from all of the per-SoC efuse_parsing() probe
callbacks.
Signed-off-by: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno <angelogioacchino.delregno@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-svs.c | 32 ++++++--------------------------
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 26 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-svs.c b/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-svs.c
index ab564d48092b..1042af2aee3f 100644
--- a/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-svs.c
+++ b/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-svs.c
@@ -1884,11 +1884,6 @@ static bool svs_mt8195_efuse_parsing(struct svs_platform *svsp)
svsb->vmax += svsb->dvt_fixed;
}
- ret = svs_get_efuse_data(svsp, "t-calibration-data",
- &svsp->tefuse, &svsp->tefuse_max);
- if (ret)
- return false;
-
Hello Angelo,
if you removed the code using `ret` in this patch, it makes sense to
also remove the variable here instead of doing it in patch 18.
It will avoid unused variable warnings for this patch.
for (i = 0; i < svsp->tefuse_max; i++)
if (svsp->tefuse[i] != 0)
break;
@@ -1949,11 +1944,6 @@ static bool svs_mt8192_efuse_parsing(struct svs_platform *svsp)
svsb->vmax += svsb->dvt_fixed;
}
- ret = svs_get_efuse_data(svsp, "t-calibration-data",
- &svsp->tefuse, &svsp->tefuse_max);
- if (ret)
- return false;
-
for (i = 0; i < svsp->tefuse_max; i++)
if (svsp->tefuse[i] != 0)
break;
@@ -2009,11 +1999,6 @@ static bool svs_mt8188_efuse_parsing(struct svs_platform *svsp)
svsb->vmax += svsb->dvt_fixed;
}
- ret = svs_get_efuse_data(svsp, "t-calibration-data",
- &svsp->tefuse, &svsp->tefuse_max);
- if (ret)
- return false;
-
for (i = 0; i < svsp->tefuse_max; i++)
if (svsp->tefuse[i] != 0)
break;
@@ -2097,11 +2082,6 @@ static bool svs_mt8186_efuse_parsing(struct svs_platform *svsp)
svsb->vmax += svsb->dvt_fixed;
}
- ret = svs_get_efuse_data(svsp, "t-calibration-data",
- &svsp->tefuse, &svsp->tefuse_max);
- if (ret)
- return false;
-
golden_temp = (svsp->tefuse[0] >> 24) & GENMASK(7, 0);
if (!golden_temp)
golden_temp = 50;
@@ -2198,11 +2178,6 @@ static bool svs_mt8183_efuse_parsing(struct svs_platform *svsp)
}
}
- ret = svs_get_efuse_data(svsp, "t-calibration-data",
- &svsp->tefuse, &svsp->tefuse_max);
- if (ret)
- return false;
-
/* Thermal efuse parsing */
adc_ge_t = (svsp->tefuse[1] >> 22) & GENMASK(9, 0);
adc_oe_t = (svsp->tefuse[1] >> 12) & GENMASK(9, 0);
@@ -3040,8 +3015,13 @@ static int svs_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
ret = svs_get_efuse_data(svsp, "svs-calibration-data",
&svsp->efuse, &svsp->efuse_max);
+ if (ret)
+ return dev_err_probe(&pdev->dev, ret, "Cannot read SVS calibration\n");
With the previous code, if svs-calibration-data could not be read, the
code would go to svs_probe_free_efuse. In your case, it returns directly.
I believe that svs_get_efuse_data using nvmem_cell_read does not
allocate the buffer for the efuse , hence no more need to free it ? The
exit code is checking if it's ERR or NULL, but still, if the buffer was
not allocated, it doesn't make sense to jump there indeed.
In that case, you are also changing the behavior here , and your commit
appears to do more than a simple move.
+
+ ret = svs_get_efuse_data(svsp, "t-calibration-data",
+ &svsp->tefuse, &svsp->tefuse_max);
if (ret) {
- ret = -EPERM;
+ dev_err_probe(&pdev->dev, ret, "Cannot read SVS-Thermal calibration\n");
goto svs_probe_free_efuse;
again in this case the tefuse has not been allocated I assume.
So previous code was a bit excessive in trying to free the efuse/tefuse ?
Eugen
}
