On 9/9/24 08:39, Jerome Brunet wrote:
Add support for POWER_GOOD_ON and POWER_GOOD_OFF standard PMBus commands. For PMBus devices that offer a POWER_GOOD signal, these commands are used for setting the output voltage at which a power good signal should be asserted and negated. Power Good signals are device and manufacturer specific. Many factors other than output voltage may be used to determine whether or not the POWER_GOOD signal is to be asserted. PMBus device users are instructed to consult the device manufacturer’s product literature for the specifics of the device they are using. Note that depending on the choice of the device manufacturer that a device may drive a POWER_GOOD signal high or low to indicate that the signal is asserted. Signed-off-by: Jerome Brunet <jbrunet@xxxxxxxxxxxx> --- drivers/hwmon/pmbus/pmbus.h | 3 +++ drivers/hwmon/pmbus/pmbus_core.c | 6 ++++++ 2 files changed, 9 insertions(+) diff --git a/drivers/hwmon/pmbus/pmbus.h b/drivers/hwmon/pmbus/pmbus.h index 5d5dc774187b..e322d2dd9fb7 100644 --- a/drivers/hwmon/pmbus/pmbus.h +++ b/drivers/hwmon/pmbus/pmbus.h @@ -78,6 +78,9 @@ enum pmbus_regs { PMBUS_IIN_OC_FAULT_LIMIT = 0x5B, PMBUS_IIN_OC_WARN_LIMIT = 0x5D,+ PMBUS_POWER_GOOD_ON = 0x5E,+ PMBUS_POWER_GOOD_OFF = 0x5F, + PMBUS_POUT_OP_FAULT_LIMIT = 0x68, PMBUS_POUT_OP_WARN_LIMIT = 0x6A, PMBUS_PIN_OP_WARN_LIMIT = 0x6B, diff --git a/drivers/hwmon/pmbus/pmbus_core.c b/drivers/hwmon/pmbus/pmbus_core.c index 0ea6fe7eb17c..94ddf0166770 100644 --- a/drivers/hwmon/pmbus/pmbus_core.c +++ b/drivers/hwmon/pmbus/pmbus_core.c @@ -1768,6 +1768,12 @@ static const struct pmbus_limit_attr vout_limit_attrs[] = { .attr = "crit", .alarm = "crit_alarm", .sbit = PB_VOLTAGE_OV_FAULT, + }, { + .reg = PMBUS_POWER_GOOD_ON, + .attr = "good_on", + }, { + .reg = PMBUS_POWER_GOOD_OFF, + .attr = "good_off", }, { .reg = PMBUS_VIRT_READ_VOUT_AVG, .update = true,
Those attributes are not hardware monitoring attributes and therefore not acceptable. In general I am not sure if they should be configurable in the first place, but definitely not from the hardware monitoring subsystem. Maybe the regulator subsystem callbacks set_over_voltage_protection and set_under_voltage_protection would be appropriate (with severity REGULATOR_SEVERITY_PROT), but that should be discussed with regulator subsystem maintainers. Thanks, Guenter
