On Wed, Dec 14, 2022 at 09:07:11AM +0100, Naresh Solanki wrote:
> From: Patrick Rudolph <patrick.rudolph@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> Implement PMBUS irq handler.
>
> Signed-off-by: Patrick Rudolph <patrick.rudolph@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Naresh Solanki <Naresh.Solanki@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
$ scripts/checkpatch.pl --strict index.html
CHECK: Blank lines aren't necessary after an open brace '{'
#131: FILE: drivers/hwmon/pmbus/pmbus_core.c:3088:
+ for (i = 0; i < data->info->pages; i++) {
+
CHECK: Alignment should match open parenthesis
#183: FILE: drivers/hwmon/pmbus/pmbus_core.c:3140:
+ ret = devm_request_threaded_irq(dev, client->irq, NULL, pmbus_fault_handler,
+ 0, "pmbus-irq", data);
CHECK: Please use a blank line after function/struct/union/enum declarations
#197: FILE: drivers/hwmon/pmbus/pmbus_core.c:3154:
}
+static int pmbus_irq_setup(struct i2c_client *client, struct pmbus_data *data)
total: 0 errors, 0 warnings, 3 checks, 109 lines checked
NOTE: For some of the reported defects, checkpatch may be able to
mechanically convert to the typical style using --fix or --fix-inplace.
index.html has style problems, please review.
Please run checkpatch --strict on your patches.
Also see Documentation/hwmon/submitting-patches.rst.
> ---
> drivers/hwmon/pmbus/pmbus.h | 2 +-
> drivers/hwmon/pmbus/pmbus_core.c | 84 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 2 files changed, 85 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
>
> base-commit: 364ffd2537c44cb6914ff5669153f4a86fffad29
>
> diff --git a/drivers/hwmon/pmbus/pmbus.h b/drivers/hwmon/pmbus/pmbus.h
> index 10fb17879f8e..6b2e6cf93b19 100644
> --- a/drivers/hwmon/pmbus/pmbus.h
> +++ b/drivers/hwmon/pmbus/pmbus.h
> @@ -26,7 +26,7 @@ enum pmbus_regs {
>
> PMBUS_CAPABILITY = 0x19,
> PMBUS_QUERY = 0x1A,
> -
> + PMBUS_SMBALERT_MASK = 0x1B,
> PMBUS_VOUT_MODE = 0x20,
> PMBUS_VOUT_COMMAND = 0x21,
> PMBUS_VOUT_TRIM = 0x22,
> diff --git a/drivers/hwmon/pmbus/pmbus_core.c b/drivers/hwmon/pmbus/pmbus_core.c
> index 95e95783972a..244fd2597252 100644
> --- a/drivers/hwmon/pmbus/pmbus_core.c
> +++ b/drivers/hwmon/pmbus/pmbus_core.c
> @@ -3072,11 +3072,89 @@ static int pmbus_regulator_register(struct pmbus_data *data)
>
> return 0;
> }
> +
> +static int pmbus_write_smbalert_mask(struct i2c_client *client, u8 page, u8 reg, u8 val)
> +{
> + return pmbus_write_word_data(client, page, PMBUS_SMBALERT_MASK, reg | (val << 8));
> +}
> +
> +static irqreturn_t pmbus_fault_handler(int irq, void *pdata)
> +{
> + struct pmbus_data *data = pdata;
> + struct i2c_client *client = to_i2c_client(data->dev);
> + int i, status;
> +
> + for (i = 0; i < data->info->pages; i++) {
> +
> + mutex_lock(&data->update_lock);
> + status = pmbus_read_status_word(client, i);
> + if (status < 0) {
> + mutex_unlock(&data->update_lock);
> + return status;
> + }
> +
> + if (status & ~(PB_STATUS_OFF | PB_STATUS_BUSY | PB_STATUS_POWER_GOOD_N))
> + pmbus_clear_fault_page(client, i);
> +
> + mutex_unlock(&data->update_lock);
> + }
> +
> + return IRQ_HANDLED;
> +}
> +
> +static int pmbus_irq_setup(struct i2c_client *client, struct pmbus_data *data)
> +{
> + struct device *dev = &client->dev;
> + const struct pmbus_regulator_status_category *cat;
> + const struct pmbus_regulator_status_assoc *bit;
> + int i, j, err, ret, func;
> + u8 mask;
> +
> + for (i = 0; i < data->info->pages; i++) {
> + func = data->info->func[i];
> +
> + for (j = 0; j < ARRAY_SIZE(pmbus_regulator_flag_map); j++) {
> + cat = &pmbus_regulator_flag_map[j];
> + if (!(func & cat->func))
> + continue;
> + mask = 0;
> + for (bit = cat->bits; bit->pflag; bit++)
> + mask |= bit->pflag;
> +
> + err = pmbus_write_smbalert_mask(client, i, cat->reg, ~mask);
> + if (err)
> + dev_err(dev, "Failed to set smbalert for reg 0x%02x\n", cat->reg);
This concerns me. It might mean that the chip does not support
PMBUS_SMBALERT_MASK. If so, there would be lots of error messages.
> + }
> +
> + pmbus_write_smbalert_mask(client, i, PMBUS_STATUS_CML, 0xff);
> + pmbus_write_smbalert_mask(client, i, PMBUS_STATUS_OTHER, 0xff);
> + pmbus_write_smbalert_mask(client, i, PMBUS_STATUS_MFR_SPECIFIC, 0xff);
Why check the return value from pmbus_write_smbalert_mask above but not here ?
> + if (data->info->func[i] & PMBUS_HAVE_FAN12)
> + pmbus_write_smbalert_mask(client, i, PMBUS_STATUS_FAN_12, 0xff);
> + if (data->info->func[i] & PMBUS_HAVE_FAN34)
> + pmbus_write_smbalert_mask(client, i, PMBUS_STATUS_FAN_34, 0xff);
> + }
> +
> + /* Register notifiers - can fail if IRQ is not given */
The comment does not make sense. pmbus_irq_setup() is not called
if the interrupt "is not given".
> + ret = devm_request_threaded_irq(dev, client->irq, NULL, pmbus_fault_handler,
> + 0, "pmbus-irq", data);
> + if (ret) {
> + dev_warn(dev, "IRQ disabled %d\n", ret);
This is not a warning, it is an error.
> + return ret;
> + }
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> #else
This is still in regulator code. I said several times that this is not
acceptable.
> static int pmbus_regulator_register(struct pmbus_data *data)
> {
> return 0;
> }
> +static int pmbus_irq_setup(struct i2c_client *client, struct pmbus_data *data)
> +{
> + return 0;
> +}
> #endif
>
> static struct dentry *pmbus_debugfs_dir; /* pmbus debugfs directory */
> @@ -3441,6 +3519,12 @@ int pmbus_do_probe(struct i2c_client *client, struct pmbus_driver_info *info)
> if (ret)
> return ret;
>
> + if (client->irq > 0) {
> + ret = pmbus_irq_setup(client, data);
> + if (ret)
> + return ret;
> + }
> +
> ret = pmbus_init_debugfs(client, data);
> if (ret)
> dev_warn(dev, "Failed to register debugfs\n");
