Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] Input: pm8xxx-vib - Add support for more PMICs

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

 





On 7/18/2023 5:41 PM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
On Tue, 18 Jul 2023 at 09:58, Fenglin Wu <quic_fenglinw@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:



On 7/18/2023 2:44 PM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
On Tue, 18 Jul 2023 at 09:27, Fenglin Wu <quic_fenglinw@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Add support for vibrator module inside PMI632, PM7250B, PM7325B.
It is very similar to vibrator inside PM8xxx but just the drive
amplitude is controlled through 2 bytes registers.

Signed-off-by: Fenglin Wu <quic_fenglinw@xxxxxxxxxxx>
---
   drivers/input/misc/pm8xxx-vibrator.c | 48 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
   1 file changed, 48 insertions(+)

diff --git a/drivers/input/misc/pm8xxx-vibrator.c b/drivers/input/misc/pm8xxx-vibrator.c
index 04cb87efd799..213fdfd47c7f 100644
--- a/drivers/input/misc/pm8xxx-vibrator.c
+++ b/drivers/input/misc/pm8xxx-vibrator.c
@@ -25,6 +25,9 @@ struct pm8xxx_regs {
          unsigned int drv_addr;
          unsigned int drv_mask;
          unsigned int drv_shift;
+       unsigned int drv_addr2;
+       unsigned int drv_mask2;
+       unsigned int drv_shift2;
          unsigned int drv_en_manual_mask;
   };

@@ -44,6 +47,42 @@ static struct pm8xxx_regs pm8916_regs = {
          .drv_en_manual_mask = 0,
   };

+static struct pm8xxx_regs pmi632_regs = {
+       .enable_addr = 0x5746,
+       .enable_mask = BIT(7),
+       .drv_addr = 0x5740,
+       .drv_mask = 0xff,
+       .drv_shift = 0,
+       .drv_addr2 = 0x5741,
+       .drv_mask2 = 0x0f,
+       .drv_shift2 = 8,

I see that you are just expanding what was done for SSBI PMICs and
later expanded to support pm8916. However it might be better to drop
the hardcoded .drv_addr (and drv_addr2) and read address from DT
instead.


Right, this is the simplest change without updating the code logic too
much. If we decided to read .drv_addr and .drv_add2 from DT, we will
have to read .enable_addr along with all other mask/shift for each
register address from DT as well because they are not consistent from
target to target. I don't know how would you suggest to add the DT
properties for all of them, but if we end up to add a property for each
of them, it won't be cleaner than hard-coding them.

No, we (correctly) have device compatibles for that. The issue with
hardcoding register addresses is that it adds extra issues here.

If I understand correctly, we have several 'generation':
- SSBI PMIC, shifted 5-bit mask, en_manual_mask, no enable_register.
- older SPMI PMIC, 5 bit drv_mask, 0 en_manual_mask, enable register at +6
- new SPMI PMIC, 12 bit drv_mask, 0 en_manual_mask, enable register at +6

For the last generation you are adding three independent entries,
while the block looks the same. If you remove drv_addr (and get it
from reg property), it would allow us to keep only the functional data
in struct pm8xxxx_regs (masks / shifts).


Okay, let me know if I understood it correctly, this is what you are suggesting:

  - hard code the mask/shifts and still keep them in struct pm8xxx_regs,
    combine the drv_mask2 to the upper byte of the drv_mask, so we will
    have following data structure for the 3rd generation vibrator

    static struct pm8xxx_regs pm7250b_regs = {
        .enable_addr = 0x5346,
        .enable_mask = BIT(7),
        .drv_mask = 0xfff,
        .drv_shift = 0,
        .drv_en_manual_mask = 0,
    };


  - move the drv_addr/drv_addr2 into DT, read them from 'reg' property.
    Because of 'mfd/qcom,spmi-pmic.yaml' has defined the 'address-cells'
    as 1 and the 'size-cells' as 0 for qcom spmi devices, we couldn't
    specify the address size to 2 even the drv_addr for the 3rd
    generation vibrator is 2 adjacent bytes. So we will end of having
    following DT scheme:

      For the 2nd generation which only has drv_addr
	vibrator@c041 {
             compatible = "qcom,pm8916-vib";
             reg = <0xc041>;  /* drv_addr */
             ...
	};

      For the 3rd generation which has both drv_addr and drv_addr2
        vibrator@5340 {
             compatible = "qcom,pm7250b-vib";
	     reg = <0x5340>,  /* drv_addr */
		   <0x5341>;  /* drv_addr2 */
	     ...
	};

Not sure how do you feel, I actually don't see too much benefit than hard-coding them in the driver. We will end up having code to check how many u32 value in the 'reg' and only assign it to drv_addr2 when the 2nd is available, also when programming drv_addr2 register, the driver will always assume the mask is in the upper byte of the drv_mask and the shift to the drive level is 8 (this seems hacky to me and it was my biggest concern while I made this change, and it led me to defining drv_shift2/drv_mask2 along with drv_addr2).





+       .drv_en_manual_mask = 0,
+};
+
+static struct pm8xxx_regs pm7250b_regs = {
+       .enable_addr = 0x5346,
+       .enable_mask = BIT(7),
+       .drv_addr = 0x5340,
+       .drv_mask = 0xff,
+       .drv_shift = 0,
+       .drv_addr2 = 0x5341,
+       .drv_mask2 = 0x0f,
+       .drv_shift2 = 8,
+       .drv_en_manual_mask = 0,
+};
+
+static struct pm8xxx_regs pm7325b_regs = {
+       .enable_addr = 0xdf46,
+       .enable_mask = BIT(7),
+       .drv_addr = 0xdf40,
+       .drv_mask = 0xff,
+       .drv_shift = 0,
+       .drv_addr2 = 0xdf41,
+       .drv_mask2 = 0x0f,
+       .drv_shift2 = 8,
+       .drv_en_manual_mask = 0,
+};
+
   /**
    * struct pm8xxx_vib - structure to hold vibrator data
    * @vib_input_dev: input device supporting force feedback
@@ -87,6 +126,12 @@ static int pm8xxx_vib_set(struct pm8xxx_vib *vib, bool on)
                  return rc;

          vib->reg_vib_drv = val;
+       if (regs->drv_addr2 != 0 && on) {
+               val = (vib->level << regs->drv_shift2) & regs->drv_mask2;
+               rc = regmap_write(vib->regmap, regs->drv_addr2, val);
+               if (rc < 0)
+                       return rc;
+       }

          if (regs->enable_mask)
                  rc = regmap_update_bits(vib->regmap, regs->enable_addr,
@@ -242,6 +287,9 @@ static const struct of_device_id pm8xxx_vib_id_table[] = {
          { .compatible = "qcom,pm8058-vib", .data = &pm8058_regs },
          { .compatible = "qcom,pm8921-vib", .data = &pm8058_regs },
          { .compatible = "qcom,pm8916-vib", .data = &pm8916_regs },
+       { .compatible = "qcom,pmi632-vib", .data = &pmi632_regs },
+       { .compatible = "qcom,pm7250b-vib", .data = &pm7250b_regs },
+       { .compatible = "qcom,pm7325b-vib", .data = &pm7325b_regs },
          { }
   };
   MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, pm8xxx_vib_id_table);
--
2.25.1









[Index of Archives]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [Linux for Sparc]     [IETF Annouce]     [Security]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux MIPS]     [ECOS]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]

  Powered by Linux