2019-11-09 15:47:57

by Andrey Skvortsov

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: [PATCH] rtc: tps65910: allow using RTC without alarm interrupt

Signed-off-by: Andrey Skvortsov <[email protected]>
---
drivers/rtc/rtc-tps65910.c | 19 +++++++++++++++----
1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/rtc/rtc-tps65910.c b/drivers/rtc/rtc-tps65910.c
index 2c0467a9e717..aa3a001ef413 100644
--- a/drivers/rtc/rtc-tps65910.c
+++ b/drivers/rtc/rtc-tps65910.c
@@ -361,6 +361,13 @@ static const struct rtc_class_ops tps65910_rtc_ops = {
.set_offset = tps65910_set_offset,
};

+static const struct rtc_class_ops tps65910_rtc_ops_noirq = {
+ .read_time = tps65910_rtc_read_time,
+ .set_time = tps65910_rtc_set_time,
+ .read_offset = tps65910_read_offset,
+ .set_offset = tps65910_set_offset,
+};
+
static int tps65910_rtc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
{
struct tps65910 *tps65910 = NULL;
@@ -415,13 +422,17 @@ static int tps65910_rtc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
tps65910_rtc_interrupt, IRQF_TRIGGER_LOW,
dev_name(&pdev->dev), &pdev->dev);
if (ret < 0) {
- dev_err(&pdev->dev, "IRQ is not free.\n");
- return ret;
+ dev_err(&pdev->dev, "request IRQ:%d failed, err = %d\n",
+ irq, ret);
+ irq = -1;
}
tps_rtc->irq = irq;
- device_set_wakeup_capable(&pdev->dev, 1);
+ if (irq != -1) {
+ device_set_wakeup_capable(&pdev->dev, 1);
+ tps_rtc->rtc->ops = &tps65910_rtc_ops;
+ } else
+ tps_rtc->rtc->ops = &tps65910_rtc_ops_noirq;

- tps_rtc->rtc->ops = &tps65910_rtc_ops;
tps_rtc->rtc->range_min = RTC_TIMESTAMP_BEGIN_2000;
tps_rtc->rtc->range_max = RTC_TIMESTAMP_END_2099;

--
2.20.1


2019-11-11 17:20:54

by Alexandre Belloni

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH] rtc: tps65910: allow using RTC without alarm interrupt

Hi,

This needs a proper commit message.

On 09/11/2019 18:46:52+0300, Andrey Skvortsov wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Andrey Skvortsov <[email protected]>
> ---
> drivers/rtc/rtc-tps65910.c | 19 +++++++++++++++----
> 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/rtc/rtc-tps65910.c b/drivers/rtc/rtc-tps65910.c
> index 2c0467a9e717..aa3a001ef413 100644
> --- a/drivers/rtc/rtc-tps65910.c
> +++ b/drivers/rtc/rtc-tps65910.c
> @@ -361,6 +361,13 @@ static const struct rtc_class_ops tps65910_rtc_ops = {
> .set_offset = tps65910_set_offset,
> };
>
> +static const struct rtc_class_ops tps65910_rtc_ops_noirq = {
> + .read_time = tps65910_rtc_read_time,
> + .set_time = tps65910_rtc_set_time,
> + .read_offset = tps65910_read_offset,
> + .set_offset = tps65910_set_offset,
> +};
> +
> static int tps65910_rtc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> {
> struct tps65910 *tps65910 = NULL;
> @@ -415,13 +422,17 @@ static int tps65910_rtc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> tps65910_rtc_interrupt, IRQF_TRIGGER_LOW,
> dev_name(&pdev->dev), &pdev->dev);
> if (ret < 0) {
> - dev_err(&pdev->dev, "IRQ is not free.\n");
> - return ret;
> + dev_err(&pdev->dev, "request IRQ:%d failed, err = %d\n",
> + irq, ret);

Do we actually need an error message here?

> + irq = -1;
> }
> tps_rtc->irq = irq;
> - device_set_wakeup_capable(&pdev->dev, 1);
> + if (irq != -1) {
> + device_set_wakeup_capable(&pdev->dev, 1);
> + tps_rtc->rtc->ops = &tps65910_rtc_ops;
> + } else
> + tps_rtc->rtc->ops = &tps65910_rtc_ops_noirq;
>
> - tps_rtc->rtc->ops = &tps65910_rtc_ops;
> tps_rtc->rtc->range_min = RTC_TIMESTAMP_BEGIN_2000;
> tps_rtc->rtc->range_max = RTC_TIMESTAMP_END_2099;
>
> --
> 2.20.1
>

--
Alexandre Belloni, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com

2019-11-13 23:09:25

by Andrey Skvortsov

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH] rtc: tps65910: allow using RTC without alarm interrupt

On 19-11-11 18:19, Alexandre Belloni wrote:
> Hi,
>
> This needs a proper commit message.

Add in v2.

> On 09/11/2019 18:46:52+0300, Andrey Skvortsov wrote:
> > Signed-off-by: Andrey Skvortsov <[email protected]>
> > ---
> > drivers/rtc/rtc-tps65910.c | 19 +++++++++++++++----
> > 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/rtc/rtc-tps65910.c b/drivers/rtc/rtc-tps65910.c
> > index 2c0467a9e717..aa3a001ef413 100644
> > --- a/drivers/rtc/rtc-tps65910.c
> > +++ b/drivers/rtc/rtc-tps65910.c
> > @@ -361,6 +361,13 @@ static const struct rtc_class_ops tps65910_rtc_ops = {
> > .set_offset = tps65910_set_offset,
> > };
> >
> > +static const struct rtc_class_ops tps65910_rtc_ops_noirq = {
> > + .read_time = tps65910_rtc_read_time,
> > + .set_time = tps65910_rtc_set_time,
> > + .read_offset = tps65910_read_offset,
> > + .set_offset = tps65910_set_offset,
> > +};
> > +
> > static int tps65910_rtc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > {
> > struct tps65910 *tps65910 = NULL;
> > @@ -415,13 +422,17 @@ static int tps65910_rtc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > tps65910_rtc_interrupt, IRQF_TRIGGER_LOW,
> > dev_name(&pdev->dev), &pdev->dev);
> > if (ret < 0) {
> > - dev_err(&pdev->dev, "IRQ is not free.\n");
> > - return ret;
> > + dev_err(&pdev->dev, "request IRQ:%d failed, err = %d\n",
> > + irq, ret);
>
> Do we actually need an error message here?

You are right. This is definitely not an error anymore.
What about
dev_warn(&pdev->dev, "unable to request IRQ, alarms disabled\n");
like some other drivers do?


grep -RHn 'unable to request IRQ, alarms disabled'
rtc-rv8803.c:576: dev_warn(&client->dev, "unable to request IRQ, alarms disabled\n");
rtc-m41t80.c:914: dev_warn(&client->dev, "unable to request IRQ, alarms disabled\n");
rtc-rv3028.c:651: dev_warn(&client->dev, "unable to request IRQ, alarms disabled\n");
rtc-pcf85363.c:416: dev_warn(&client->dev, "unable to request IRQ, alarms disabled\n");
rtc-pcf85063.c:458: "unable to request IRQ, alarms disabled\n");
rtc-rv3029c2.c:828: dev_warn(dev, "unable to request IRQ, alarms disabled\n");
rtc-rx8025.c:540: dev_err(&client->dev, "unable to request IRQ, alarms disabled\n");
rtc-abx80x.c:839: dev_err(&client->dev, "unable to request IRQ, alarms disabled\n");


>
> > + irq = -1;
> > }
> > tps_rtc->irq = irq;
> > - device_set_wakeup_capable(&pdev->dev, 1);
> > + if (irq != -1) {
> > + device_set_wakeup_capable(&pdev->dev, 1);
> > + tps_rtc->rtc->ops = &tps65910_rtc_ops;
> > + } else
> > + tps_rtc->rtc->ops = &tps65910_rtc_ops_noirq;
> >
> > - tps_rtc->rtc->ops = &tps65910_rtc_ops;
> > tps_rtc->rtc->range_min = RTC_TIMESTAMP_BEGIN_2000;
> > tps_rtc->rtc->range_max = RTC_TIMESTAMP_END_2099;
> >
> > --
> > 2.20.1
> >
>
> --
> Alexandre Belloni, Bootlin
> Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
> https://bootlin.com

--
Best regards,
Andrey Skvortsov


Attachments:
(No filename) (2.96 kB)
signature.asc (849.00 B)
Download all attachments

2019-11-14 20:00:49

by Alexandre Belloni

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH] rtc: tps65910: allow using RTC without alarm interrupt

On 14/11/2019 02:08:05+0300, Andrey Skvortsov wrote:
> > > static int tps65910_rtc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > > {
> > > struct tps65910 *tps65910 = NULL;
> > > @@ -415,13 +422,17 @@ static int tps65910_rtc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > > tps65910_rtc_interrupt, IRQF_TRIGGER_LOW,
> > > dev_name(&pdev->dev), &pdev->dev);
> > > if (ret < 0) {
> > > - dev_err(&pdev->dev, "IRQ is not free.\n");
> > > - return ret;
> > > + dev_err(&pdev->dev, "request IRQ:%d failed, err = %d\n",
> > > + irq, ret);
> >
> > Do we actually need an error message here?
>
> You are right. This is definitely not an error anymore.
> What about
> dev_warn(&pdev->dev, "unable to request IRQ, alarms disabled\n");
> like some other drivers do?
>

Yes, or that can be left out completely as userspace will be able to
know whether alarms are supported without this message.


--
Alexandre Belloni, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com

2019-11-16 20:44:58

by Andrey Skvortsov

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: [PATCHv2] rtc: tps65910: allow using RTC without alarm interrupt

If tps65910 INT1 pin (IRQ output) is not wired to any IRQ controller,
then it can't be used as system wakeup/alarm source,
but it is still possible to read/write time from/to RTC.

Signed-off-by: Andrey Skvortsov <[email protected]>
---

v1 -> v2:
- add detailed commit description
- remove error message about failed IRQ request

drivers/rtc/rtc-tps65910.c | 21 +++++++++++++++------
1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/rtc/rtc-tps65910.c b/drivers/rtc/rtc-tps65910.c
index 2c0467a9e717..e3840386f430 100644
--- a/drivers/rtc/rtc-tps65910.c
+++ b/drivers/rtc/rtc-tps65910.c
@@ -361,6 +361,13 @@ static const struct rtc_class_ops tps65910_rtc_ops = {
.set_offset = tps65910_set_offset,
};

+static const struct rtc_class_ops tps65910_rtc_ops_noirq = {
+ .read_time = tps65910_rtc_read_time,
+ .set_time = tps65910_rtc_set_time,
+ .read_offset = tps65910_read_offset,
+ .set_offset = tps65910_set_offset,
+};
+
static int tps65910_rtc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
{
struct tps65910 *tps65910 = NULL;
@@ -414,14 +421,16 @@ static int tps65910_rtc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
ret = devm_request_threaded_irq(&pdev->dev, irq, NULL,
tps65910_rtc_interrupt, IRQF_TRIGGER_LOW,
dev_name(&pdev->dev), &pdev->dev);
- if (ret < 0) {
- dev_err(&pdev->dev, "IRQ is not free.\n");
- return ret;
- }
+ if (ret < 0)
+ irq = -1;
+
tps_rtc->irq = irq;
- device_set_wakeup_capable(&pdev->dev, 1);
+ if (irq != -1) {
+ device_set_wakeup_capable(&pdev->dev, 1);
+ tps_rtc->rtc->ops = &tps65910_rtc_ops;
+ } else
+ tps_rtc->rtc->ops = &tps65910_rtc_ops_noirq;

- tps_rtc->rtc->ops = &tps65910_rtc_ops;
tps_rtc->rtc->range_min = RTC_TIMESTAMP_BEGIN_2000;
tps_rtc->rtc->range_max = RTC_TIMESTAMP_END_2099;

--
2.20.1

2019-11-18 14:21:50

by Alexandre Belloni

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCHv2] rtc: tps65910: allow using RTC without alarm interrupt

On 16/11/2019 23:37:48+0300, Andrey Skvortsov wrote:
> If tps65910 INT1 pin (IRQ output) is not wired to any IRQ controller,
> then it can't be used as system wakeup/alarm source,
> but it is still possible to read/write time from/to RTC.
>
> Signed-off-by: Andrey Skvortsov <[email protected]>
> ---
>
> v1 -> v2:
> - add detailed commit description
> - remove error message about failed IRQ request
>
> drivers/rtc/rtc-tps65910.c | 21 +++++++++++++++------
> 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
Applied, thanks.

--
Alexandre Belloni, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com