pt., 13 gru 2019 o 09:47 Bibby Hsieh <bibby.hsieh@xxxxxxxxxxxx> napisał(a):
>
> Although in the most platforms, the power of eeprom are alway
> on, some platforms disable the eeprom power in order to meet
> low power request. This patch add the pm_runtime ops to control
> power to support all platforms.
>
> Signed-off-by: Bibby Hsieh <bibby.hsieh@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/misc/eeprom/at24.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 40 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/misc/eeprom/at24.c b/drivers/misc/eeprom/at24.c
> index 0681d5fdd538..06ae2cc32f79 100644
> --- a/drivers/misc/eeprom/at24.c
> +++ b/drivers/misc/eeprom/at24.c
> @@ -22,6 +22,7 @@
> #include <linux/nvmem-provider.h>
> #include <linux/regmap.h>
> #include <linux/pm_runtime.h>
> +#include <linux/regulator/consumer.h>
> #include <linux/gpio/consumer.h>
>
> /* Address pointer is 16 bit. */
> @@ -91,6 +92,7 @@ struct at24_data {
>
> struct gpio_desc *wp_gpio;
>
> + struct regulator *vcc_reg;
> /*
> * Some chips tie up multiple I2C addresses; dummy devices reserve
> * them for us, and we'll use them with SMBus calls.
> @@ -662,6 +664,12 @@ static int at24_probe(struct i2c_client *client)
> at24->client[0].client = client;
> at24->client[0].regmap = regmap;
>
> + at24->vcc_reg = devm_regulator_get(dev, "vcc");
> + if (IS_ERR(at24->vcc_reg)) {
> + dev_err(dev, "failed to get at24 VCC regulator\n");
The regulator core is quite verbose in its error messages when calling
regulator_get() - you don't need to add yours here. Just return the
error code.
> + return PTR_ERR(at24->vcc_reg);
> + }
> +
> at24->wp_gpio = devm_gpiod_get_optional(dev, "wp", GPIOD_OUT_HIGH);
> if (IS_ERR(at24->wp_gpio))
> return PTR_ERR(at24->wp_gpio);
> @@ -701,6 +709,12 @@ static int at24_probe(struct i2c_client *client)
>
> i2c_set_clientdata(client, at24);
>
> + err = regulator_enable(at24->vcc_reg);
> + if (err) {
> + dev_err(dev, "Failed to enable at24 vcc regulator\n");
Drop the at24 name - dev_err() will print the device name for you.
> + return err;
> + }
> +
> /* enable runtime pm */
> pm_runtime_set_active(dev);
> pm_runtime_enable(dev);
> @@ -713,6 +727,7 @@ static int at24_probe(struct i2c_client *client)
> pm_runtime_idle(dev);
> if (err) {
> pm_runtime_disable(dev);
> + regulator_disable(at24->vcc_reg);
> return -ENODEV;
> }
>
> @@ -729,14 +744,39 @@ static int at24_probe(struct i2c_client *client)
> static int at24_remove(struct i2c_client *client)
> {
> pm_runtime_disable(&client->dev);
> + if (pm_runtime_status_suspended(&client->dev))
> + regulator_disable(at24->vcc_reg);
Why didn't you fix the inverted logic here as I pointed out back in v6
of this series?
Bart
> pm_runtime_set_suspended(&client->dev);
>
> return 0;
> }
>
> +static int __maybe_unused at24_suspend(struct device *dev)
> +{
> + struct i2c_client *client = to_i2c_client(dev);
> + struct at24_data *at24 = i2c_get_clientdata(client);
> +
> + return regulator_disable(at24->vcc_reg);
> +}
> +
> +static int __maybe_unused at24_resume(struct device *dev)
> +{
> + struct i2c_client *client = to_i2c_client(dev);
> + struct at24_data *at24 = i2c_get_clientdata(client);
> +
> + return regulator_enable(at24->vcc_reg);
> +}
> +
> +static const struct dev_pm_ops at24_pm_ops = {
> + SET_SYSTEM_SLEEP_PM_OPS(pm_runtime_force_suspend,
> + pm_runtime_force_resume)
> + SET_RUNTIME_PM_OPS(at24_suspend, at24_resume, NULL)
> +};
> +
> static struct i2c_driver at24_driver = {
> .driver = {
> .name = "at24",
> + .pm = &at24_pm_ops,
> .of_match_table = at24_of_match,
> .acpi_match_table = ACPI_PTR(at24_acpi_ids),
> },
> --
> 2.18.0
