This patch fixes system shutdown on a devices that use TPS65910 as a
system's power controller. In accordance to the TPS65910 datasheet, the
PMIC's state-machine transitions into the OFF state only when DEV_OFF
bit of DEVCTRL_REG is set. The ON / SLEEP states also should be cleared,
otherwise PMIC won't get into a proper state on shutdown. Devices like
Nexus 7 tablet and Ouya game console are now shutting down properly.
Tested-by: Zack Pearsall <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Dmitry Osipenko <[email protected]>
---
Changelog:
v2: - Now using a single tps65910_reg_update_bits() instead of set+clear.
Thanks to Michał Mirosław for the suggestion.
drivers/mfd/tps65910.c | 9 +++++++--
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/mfd/tps65910.c b/drivers/mfd/tps65910.c
index 11959021b50a..3f4483dec871 100644
--- a/drivers/mfd/tps65910.c
+++ b/drivers/mfd/tps65910.c
@@ -440,8 +440,13 @@ static void tps65910_power_off(void)
DEVCTRL_PWR_OFF_MASK) < 0)
return;
- tps65910_reg_clear_bits(tps65910, TPS65910_DEVCTRL,
- DEVCTRL_DEV_ON_MASK);
+ if (tps65910_reg_clear_bits(tps65910, TPS65910_DEVCTRL,
+ DEVCTRL_DEV_SLP_MASK) < 0)
+ return;
+
+ tps65910_reg_update_bits(tps65910, TPS65910_DEVCTRL,
+ DEVCTRL_DEV_OFF_MASK | DEVCTRL_DEV_ON_MASK,
+ DEVCTRL_DEV_OFF_MASK);
}
static int tps65910_i2c_probe(struct i2c_client *i2c,
--
2.26.0
On Sun, 24 May 2020, Dmitry Osipenko wrote:
> This patch fixes system shutdown on a devices that use TPS65910 as a
> system's power controller. In accordance to the TPS65910 datasheet, the
> PMIC's state-machine transitions into the OFF state only when DEV_OFF
> bit of DEVCTRL_REG is set. The ON / SLEEP states also should be cleared,
> otherwise PMIC won't get into a proper state on shutdown. Devices like
> Nexus 7 tablet and Ouya game console are now shutting down properly.
>
> Tested-by: Zack Pearsall <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: Dmitry Osipenko <[email protected]>
> ---
>
> Changelog:
>
> v2: - Now using a single tps65910_reg_update_bits() instead of set+clear.
> Thanks to Michał Mirosław for the suggestion.
Michał should review.
> drivers/mfd/tps65910.c | 9 +++++++--
> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/mfd/tps65910.c b/drivers/mfd/tps65910.c
> index 11959021b50a..3f4483dec871 100644
> --- a/drivers/mfd/tps65910.c
> +++ b/drivers/mfd/tps65910.c
> @@ -440,8 +440,13 @@ static void tps65910_power_off(void)
> DEVCTRL_PWR_OFF_MASK) < 0)
> return;
>
> - tps65910_reg_clear_bits(tps65910, TPS65910_DEVCTRL,
> - DEVCTRL_DEV_ON_MASK);
> + if (tps65910_reg_clear_bits(tps65910, TPS65910_DEVCTRL,
> + DEVCTRL_DEV_SLP_MASK) < 0)
> + return;
> +
> + tps65910_reg_update_bits(tps65910, TPS65910_DEVCTRL,
> + DEVCTRL_DEV_OFF_MASK | DEVCTRL_DEV_ON_MASK,
> + DEVCTRL_DEV_OFF_MASK);
> }
>
> static int tps65910_i2c_probe(struct i2c_client *i2c,
--
Lee Jones [李琼斯]
Linaro Services Technical Lead
Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog
On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 10:26:43PM +0300, Dmitry Osipenko wrote:
> This patch fixes system shutdown on a devices that use TPS65910 as a
> system's power controller. In accordance to the TPS65910 datasheet, the
> PMIC's state-machine transitions into the OFF state only when DEV_OFF
> bit of DEVCTRL_REG is set. The ON / SLEEP states also should be cleared,
> otherwise PMIC won't get into a proper state on shutdown. Devices like
> Nexus 7 tablet and Ouya game console are now shutting down properly.
The datasheets of 65910 and 65911 say that ON and SLP bits are cleared
during OFF state. But I guess the hardware might work differently.
[...]
> --- a/drivers/mfd/tps65910.c
> +++ b/drivers/mfd/tps65910.c
> @@ -440,8 +440,13 @@ static void tps65910_power_off(void)
> DEVCTRL_PWR_OFF_MASK) < 0)
> return;
>
> - tps65910_reg_clear_bits(tps65910, TPS65910_DEVCTRL,
> - DEVCTRL_DEV_ON_MASK);
> + if (tps65910_reg_clear_bits(tps65910, TPS65910_DEVCTRL,
> + DEVCTRL_DEV_SLP_MASK) < 0)
> + return;
> +
> + tps65910_reg_update_bits(tps65910, TPS65910_DEVCTRL,
> + DEVCTRL_DEV_OFF_MASK | DEVCTRL_DEV_ON_MASK,
> + DEVCTRL_DEV_OFF_MASK);
> }
There is tps65910_reg_set_bits() at the start of function. I guess it
doesn't work if your changes are needed. Maybe you can remove it?
I would also include your observations about the chip's behaviour in the
commit message so it doesn't get "fixed" later.
Best Regards,
Micha? Miros?aw
26.05.2020 18:01, Michał Mirosław пишет:
> On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 10:26:43PM +0300, Dmitry Osipenko wrote:
>> This patch fixes system shutdown on a devices that use TPS65910 as a
>> system's power controller. In accordance to the TPS65910 datasheet, the
>> PMIC's state-machine transitions into the OFF state only when DEV_OFF
>> bit of DEVCTRL_REG is set. The ON / SLEEP states also should be cleared,
>> otherwise PMIC won't get into a proper state on shutdown. Devices like
>> Nexus 7 tablet and Ouya game console are now shutting down properly.
>
> The datasheets of 65910 and 65911 say that ON and SLP bits are cleared
> during OFF state. But I guess the hardware might work differently.
Indeed, sounds like we can remove the SLP bit-clearing safely. IIUC,
both tps65910 and tps65911 are nearly the same in regards to the
power-off programming, tps65911 only supports an additional (sequential)
power-off mode.
I'm not sure whether we've tried to remove the SLP bit-clearing before,
will be interesting to try.
> [...]
>> --- a/drivers/mfd/tps65910.c
>> +++ b/drivers/mfd/tps65910.c
>> @@ -440,8 +440,13 @@ static void tps65910_power_off(void)
>> DEVCTRL_PWR_OFF_MASK) < 0)
>> return;
>>
>> - tps65910_reg_clear_bits(tps65910, TPS65910_DEVCTRL,
>> - DEVCTRL_DEV_ON_MASK);
>> + if (tps65910_reg_clear_bits(tps65910, TPS65910_DEVCTRL,
>> + DEVCTRL_DEV_SLP_MASK) < 0)
>> + return;
>> +
>> + tps65910_reg_update_bits(tps65910, TPS65910_DEVCTRL,
>> + DEVCTRL_DEV_OFF_MASK | DEVCTRL_DEV_ON_MASK,
>> + DEVCTRL_DEV_OFF_MASK);
>> }
>
> There is tps65910_reg_set_bits() at the start of function. I guess it
> doesn't work if your changes are needed. Maybe you can remove it?
It enables the "sequential power-off, reverse of power-on sequence",
like datasheet says. I think it works and we actually need that PWR_OFF
bit to be set separately, before setting the DEV_OFF bit.
> I would also include your observations about the chip's behaviour in the
> commit message so it doesn't get "fixed" later.
I'll add a clarifying comment about it in v3, thank you for the suggestions.