On 07-05-2013 09:01, Amit Daniel Kachhap wrote:
> TMU probe function now checks for a device tree defined regulator.
> For compatibility reasons it is allowed to probe driver even without
> this regulator defined.
>
> Signed-off-by: Lukasz Majewski <l.majewski@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Kyungmin Park <kyungmin.park@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Amit Daniel Kachhap <amit.daniel@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> .../devicetree/bindings/thermal/exynos-thermal.txt | 4 ++++
> drivers/thermal/samsung/exynos_tmu.c | 19 +++++++++++++++++++
> 2 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/thermal/exynos-thermal.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/thermal/exynos-thermal.txt
> index 970eeba..ff62f7a 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/thermal/exynos-thermal.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/thermal/exynos-thermal.txt
> @@ -14,6 +14,9 @@
> - interrupts : Should contain interrupt for thermal system
> - clocks : The main clock for TMU device
> - clock-names : Thermal system clock name
> +- vtmu-supply: This entry is optional and provides the regulator node supplying
> + voltage to TMU. If needed this entry can be placed inside
> + board/platform specific dts file.
>
> Example 1):
>
> @@ -25,6 +28,7 @@ Example 1):
> clocks = <&clock 383>;
> clock-names = "tmu_apbif";
> status = "disabled";
> + vtmu-supply = <&tmu_regulator_node>;
> };
>
> Example 2):
> diff --git a/drivers/thermal/samsung/exynos_tmu.c b/drivers/thermal/samsung/exynos_tmu.c
> index 72446c9..b7c609a 100644
> --- a/drivers/thermal/samsung/exynos_tmu.c
> +++ b/drivers/thermal/samsung/exynos_tmu.c
> @@ -32,6 +32,7 @@
> #include <linux/of_address.h>
> #include <linux/of_irq.h>
> #include <linux/platform_device.h>
> +#include <linux/regulator/consumer.h>
> #include <linux/slab.h>
> #include <linux/workqueue.h>
> #include "exynos_thermal_common.h"
> @@ -52,6 +53,7 @@
> * @clk: pointer to the clock structure.
> * @temp_error1: fused value of the first point trim.
> * @temp_error2: fused value of the second point trim.
> + * @regulator: pointer to the TMU regulator structure.
> * @reg_conf: pointer to structure to register with core thermal.
> */
> struct exynos_tmu_data {
> @@ -65,6 +67,7 @@ struct exynos_tmu_data {
> struct mutex lock;
> struct clk *clk;
> u8 temp_error1, temp_error2;
> + struct regulator *regulator;
> struct thermal_sensor_conf *reg_conf;
> };
>
> @@ -501,10 +504,23 @@ static int exynos_map_dt_data(struct platform_device *pdev)
> struct exynos_tmu_data *data = platform_get_drvdata(pdev);
> struct exynos_tmu_platform_data *pdata = data->pdata;
> struct resource res;
> + int ret;
>
> if (!data)
> return -ENODEV;
>
> + /* Try enabling the regulator if found */
> + data->regulator = devm_regulator_get(&pdev->dev, "vtmu");
> + if (!IS_ERR(data->regulator)) {
> + ret = regulator_enable(data->regulator);
> + if (ret) {
> + dev_err(&pdev->dev, "failed to enable vtmu\n");
> + return ret;
> + }
> + } else {
> + dev_info(&pdev->dev, "Regulator node (vtmu) not found\n");
Now that you have a bitfield for your features, shouldnt this become a
check? If the SoC requires the regulator, then it has to return a valid
regulator (regulator_get). Meaning, if your SoC version requires this
feature and the regulator_get returns an error, you must treat as an
error an not continue gracefuly.
> + }
> +
> data->id = of_alias_get_id(pdev->dev.of_node, "tmuctrl");
> if (data->id < 0)
> data->id = 0;
> @@ -669,6 +685,9 @@ static int exynos_tmu_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
>
> clk_unprepare(data->clk);
>
> + if (!IS_ERR(data->regulator))
> + regulator_disable(data->regulator);
> +
> platform_set_drvdata(pdev, NULL);
>
> return 0;
>
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
