On 04/23/2015 05:17 AM, Grygorii.Strashko@xxxxxxxxxx wrote: > On 04/23/2015 03:00 AM, Nishanth Menon wrote: >> On 04/22/2015 08:26 AM, Grygorii.Strashko@xxxxxxxxxx wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> On 04/21/2015 03:51 AM, Nishanth Menon wrote: >>>> Alarm interrupt enable register is at offset 0x7, while the time >>>> registers for the alarm follow that. When we program Alarm interrupt >>>> enable prior to programming the time, it is possible that previous >>>> time value could be close or match at the time of alarm enable >>>> resulting in interrupt trigger which is unexpected (and does not match >>>> the time we expect it to trigger). >>>> >>>> To prevent this scenario from occuring, program the ALM0_EN bit only >>>> after the alarm time is appropriately programmed. >>>> >>>> Ofcourse, I2C programming is non-atomic, so there are loopholes where >>>> the interrupt wont trigger if the time requested is in the past at >>>> the time of programming the ALM0_EN bit. However, we will not have >>>> unexpected interrupts while the time is programmed after the interrupt >>>> are enabled. >>> >>> I think it will be nice if you will mention that you going to follow >>> vendor recommendations - AN1491 Configuring the MCP794XX RTCC Family >>> http://ww1.microchip.com/downloads/en/AppNotes/01491A.pdf >>> ;) >>> "Also, it is recommended that the alarm registers be loaded >>> before the alarm is enabled." >>> >> >> Hmm... i did not know that existed, thanks for digging it up.. that >> teaches me to look for docs before putting a scope/LA on the board >> (not that I regret doing that)... That said, reading the app note, I >> kind of realized: >> a) that playing with ST bit for programming time is not done, but >> then, that implies that oscillator will have to be restarted (upto a >> few seconds for certain crystals).. but that said, it does not seem >> mandatory or seem to (yet seen) functional issues... >> >> b) We dont have flexibility yet to describe if we do indeed have a >> backup battery or not - VBATEN should be set only if we have a backup >> battery on the platform :( - on some it might even be optional thanks >> to certain compliance requirements of shipping boards internationally >> and general "unlike" of lithium ion in cargo hold.. >> >> c) we dont have capability to control the alarm polarity in the driver >> which, by the way, we probably should also control OUT polarity (when >> ALARM is not asserted).. >> >> d) we dont have support for external 32k oscillator(X1 only) instead >> of assuming we always have a 32k crystal(X1 and X2)... >> >> Ugghhh... more cleaning up to do for the future.. >> >> that said, the sequence it does recommend (in page 4): >> The following steps show how the Alarm 0 is config- >> ured. Alarm 1 can be configured in the same manner. >> 1. Write 0x23 to the Alarm0 Seconds register >> [0x0A]. >> 2. Write 0x47 to the Alarm0 Minutes register >> [0x0B]. >> 3. Write 0x71 to the Alarm0 Hours register [0x0C] >> – 11 hours in 12-hour format. >> 4. Write 0x72 to the Alarm0 Day register [0x0D] – >> Tuesday + Alarm Polarity Low + Match on all. >> The Alarm0 Interrupt Flag is also cleared. >> 5. Write 0x14 to the Alarm0 Date register [0x0E]. >> 6. Write 0x08 to the Alarm0 Month register [0x0F]. >> With all the Alarm0 registers set we can now activate >> the Alarm0 on the Control register. >> 7. Write 0x10 to the Control register [0x07] – >> Alarm0 enabled no CLKOUT, Alarm1 disabled >> >> before this patch we do ( http://pastebin.ubuntu.com/10863880/) >> CONTROL r[7] = 0x90 (OUT=1, ALM0EN=1) >> OSCTRIM r[8] = 0x00 >> EEUNLOCK r[9] = 0x00 >> ALM0SEC r[A] = 0x01 >> ALM0MIN r[B] = 0x45 >> ALM0HOUR r[C] = 0x23 >> ALM0WKDAY r[D] = 0x75 <-ALMOIF is cleared >> ALM0DATE r[E] = 0x09 >> ALM0MTH r[F] = 0x04 >> RSRVED r[10] = 0x01 >> >> with this patch, we do: >> burst( CONTROL r[7] = 0x80 (OUT=1) >> OSCTRIM r[8] = 0x00 >> EEUNLOCK r[9] = 0x00 >> ALM0SEC r[A] = 0x01 >> ALM0MIN r[B] = 0x45 >> ALM0HOUR r[C] = 0x23 >> ALM0WKDAY r[D] = 0x75 <-ALMOIF is cleared >> ALM0DATE r[E] = 0x09 >> ALM0MTH r[F] = 0x04 >> RSRVED r[10] = 0x01 >> ) >> CONTROL r[7] = 0x90 (OUT=1, ALM0EN=1) >> >> Which is slightly unoptimal way of what the app note recommends. - as >> I mentioned earlier in this thread, I will try and do optimizations in >> a later patch. >> >> Given that Andrew had picked up this patch, I dont see a reason to >> respin this yet. but will include the app note for future patches - >> thanks for pointing it out to me. > > ^^ Up to you. Np, Always yours! Considering the narrow focus of the current patch (which does fix an issue that it attempts to), can I get an Ack? -- Regards, Nishanth Menon -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html