Since config.dev = pdev->dev.parent in current code, so
dev_get_drvdata(rdev->dev.parent) actually returns the drvdata of the mfd
device rather than the regulator. Fix it.
Fixes: 9bc146acc331 ("regulator: hi6421v600: Fix setting wrong driver_data")
Reported-by: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Axel Lin <[email protected]>
---
Hi Mauro,
Thanks for your analysis.
Could you check if this patch works if you think it's good.
I don't mind applying your earlier fix or this one.
(This one has less code change with single purpose fot the fix,
and this patch does not has other dependency.)
Regards,
Axel
drivers/regulator/hi6421v600-regulator.c | 16 +++++++++-------
1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/regulator/hi6421v600-regulator.c b/drivers/regulator/hi6421v600-regulator.c
index 9b162c0555c3..845bc3b4026d 100644
--- a/drivers/regulator/hi6421v600-regulator.c
+++ b/drivers/regulator/hi6421v600-regulator.c
@@ -98,10 +98,9 @@ static const unsigned int ldo34_voltages[] = {
static int hi6421_spmi_regulator_enable(struct regulator_dev *rdev)
{
- struct hi6421_spmi_reg_priv *priv;
+ struct hi6421_spmi_reg_priv *priv = rdev_get_drvdata(rdev);
int ret;
- priv = dev_get_drvdata(rdev->dev.parent);
/* cannot enable more than one regulator at one time */
mutex_lock(&priv->enable_mutex);
@@ -119,9 +118,10 @@ static int hi6421_spmi_regulator_enable(struct regulator_dev *rdev)
static unsigned int hi6421_spmi_regulator_get_mode(struct regulator_dev *rdev)
{
- struct hi6421_spmi_reg_info *sreg = rdev_get_drvdata(rdev);
+ struct hi6421_spmi_reg_info *sreg;
unsigned int reg_val;
+ sreg = container_of(rdev->desc, struct hi6421_spmi_reg_info, desc);
regmap_read(rdev->regmap, rdev->desc->enable_reg, ®_val);
if (reg_val & sreg->eco_mode_mask)
@@ -133,9 +133,10 @@ static unsigned int hi6421_spmi_regulator_get_mode(struct regulator_dev *rdev)
static int hi6421_spmi_regulator_set_mode(struct regulator_dev *rdev,
unsigned int mode)
{
- struct hi6421_spmi_reg_info *sreg = rdev_get_drvdata(rdev);
+ struct hi6421_spmi_reg_info *sreg;
unsigned int val;
+ sreg = container_of(rdev->desc, struct hi6421_spmi_reg_info, desc);
switch (mode) {
case REGULATOR_MODE_NORMAL:
val = 0;
@@ -159,7 +160,9 @@ hi6421_spmi_regulator_get_optimum_mode(struct regulator_dev *rdev,
int input_uV, int output_uV,
int load_uA)
{
- struct hi6421_spmi_reg_info *sreg = rdev_get_drvdata(rdev);
+ struct hi6421_spmi_reg_info *sreg;
+
+ sreg = container_of(rdev->desc, struct hi6421_spmi_reg_info, desc);
if (!sreg->eco_uA || ((unsigned int)load_uA > sreg->eco_uA))
return REGULATOR_MODE_NORMAL;
@@ -252,13 +255,12 @@ static int hi6421_spmi_regulator_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
return -ENOMEM;
mutex_init(&priv->enable_mutex);
- platform_set_drvdata(pdev, priv);
for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(regulator_info); i++) {
info = ®ulator_info[i];
config.dev = pdev->dev.parent;
- config.driver_data = info;
+ config.driver_data = priv;
config.regmap = pmic->regmap;
rdev = devm_regulator_register(dev, &info->desc, &config);
--
2.25.1
Hi Axel,
Em Wed, 30 Jun 2021 15:42:46 +0800
Axel Lin <[email protected]> escreveu:
> Since config.dev = pdev->dev.parent in current code, so
> dev_get_drvdata(rdev->dev.parent) actually returns the drvdata of the mfd
> device rather than the regulator. Fix it.
>
> Fixes: 9bc146acc331 ("regulator: hi6421v600: Fix setting wrong driver_data")
> Reported-by: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: Axel Lin <[email protected]>
> ---
> Hi Mauro,
> Thanks for your analysis.
> Could you check if this patch works if you think it's good.
> I don't mind applying your earlier fix or this one.
> (This one has less code change with single purpose fot the fix,
> and this patch does not has other dependency.)
Yeah, this fixed the issue:
[ 1.105691] spmi spmi-0: spmi_controller_wait_for_done: status 0x1
[ 1.111942] spmi spmi-0: spmi_write_cmd: id:0 slave_addr:0x202, wrote value: ff
[ 1.119344] spmi spmi-0: spmi_controller_wait_for_done: status 0x1
[ 1.125589] spmi spmi-0: spmi_write_cmd: id:0 slave_addr:0x203, wrote value: ff
[ 1.132992] spmi spmi-0: spmi_controller_wait_for_done: status 0x1
[ 1.139238] spmi spmi-0: spmi_read_cmd: id:0 slave_addr:0x212, read value: 00
[ 1.146461] spmi spmi-0: spmi_controller_wait_for_done: status 0x1
[ 1.152706] spmi spmi-0: spmi_write_cmd: id:0 slave_addr:0x212, wrote value: ff
[ 1.160103] spmi spmi-0: spmi_controller_wait_for_done: status 0x1
[ 1.166348] spmi spmi-0: spmi_read_cmd: id:0 slave_addr:0x213, read value: 00
[ 1.173570] spmi spmi-0: spmi_controller_wait_for_done: status 0x1
[ 1.179815] spmi spmi-0: spmi_write_cmd: id:0 slave_addr:0x213, wrote value: ff
[ 1.187723] spmi spmi-0: spmi_controller_wait_for_done: status 0x1
[ 1.193970] spmi spmi-0: spmi_read_cmd: id:0 slave_addr:0x51, read value: 08
[ 1.201114] spmi spmi-0: spmi_controller_wait_for_done: status 0x1
[ 1.207358] spmi spmi-0: spmi_read_cmd: id:0 slave_addr:0x16, read value: 03
[ 1.234794] spmi spmi-0: spmi_controller_wait_for_done: status 0x1
[ 1.241040] spmi spmi-0: spmi_read_cmd: id:0 slave_addr:0x51, read value: 08
[ 1.248182] spmi spmi-0: spmi_controller_wait_for_done: status 0x1
[ 1.254428] spmi spmi-0: spmi_read_cmd: id:0 slave_addr:0x16, read value: 03
[ 1.261560] ldo3: 1500 <--> 2000 mV at 1800 mV, enabled
...
hikey970 login:
And the regulators are also working:
$ lsusb
Bus 002 Device 002: ID 0451:8140 Texas Instruments, Inc. TUSB8041 4-Port Hub
Bus 002 Device 001: ID 1d6b:0003 Linux Foundation 3.0 root hub
Bus 001 Device 003: ID 046d:c52b Logitech, Inc. Unifying Receiver
Bus 001 Device 002: ID 0451:8142 Texas Instruments, Inc. TUSB8041 4-Port Hub
Bus 001 Device 001: ID 1d6b:0002 Linux Foundation 2.0 root hub
Thanks!
I'm OK on merging this version.
Tested-by: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <[email protected]>
-
It would be better to merge this version either via Greg's tree or before
-rc1, in order to avoid conflicts with staging, as there will be a change
on this hunk:
@@ -252,13 +255,12 @@ static int hi6421_spmi_regulator_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
return -ENOMEM;
mutex_init(&priv->enable_mutex);
- platform_set_drvdata(pdev, priv);
for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(regulator_info); i++) {
info = ®ulator_info[i];
config.dev = pdev->dev.parent;
- config.driver_data = info;
+ config.driver_data = priv;
config.regmap = pmic->regmap;
rdev = devm_regulator_register(dev, &info->desc, &config);
As a patch at staging will be doing:
- config.regmap = pmic->regmap;
+ config.regmap = regmap;
>
> Regards,
> Axel
> drivers/regulator/hi6421v600-regulator.c | 16 +++++++++-------
> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/regulator/hi6421v600-regulator.c b/drivers/regulator/hi6421v600-regulator.c
> index 9b162c0555c3..845bc3b4026d 100644
> --- a/drivers/regulator/hi6421v600-regulator.c
> +++ b/drivers/regulator/hi6421v600-regulator.c
> @@ -98,10 +98,9 @@ static const unsigned int ldo34_voltages[] = {
>
> static int hi6421_spmi_regulator_enable(struct regulator_dev *rdev)
> {
> - struct hi6421_spmi_reg_priv *priv;
> + struct hi6421_spmi_reg_priv *priv = rdev_get_drvdata(rdev);
> int ret;
>
> - priv = dev_get_drvdata(rdev->dev.parent);
> /* cannot enable more than one regulator at one time */
> mutex_lock(&priv->enable_mutex);
>
> @@ -119,9 +118,10 @@ static int hi6421_spmi_regulator_enable(struct regulator_dev *rdev)
>
> static unsigned int hi6421_spmi_regulator_get_mode(struct regulator_dev *rdev)
> {
> - struct hi6421_spmi_reg_info *sreg = rdev_get_drvdata(rdev);
> + struct hi6421_spmi_reg_info *sreg;
> unsigned int reg_val;
>
> + sreg = container_of(rdev->desc, struct hi6421_spmi_reg_info, desc);
> regmap_read(rdev->regmap, rdev->desc->enable_reg, ®_val);
>
> if (reg_val & sreg->eco_mode_mask)
> @@ -133,9 +133,10 @@ static unsigned int hi6421_spmi_regulator_get_mode(struct regulator_dev *rdev)
> static int hi6421_spmi_regulator_set_mode(struct regulator_dev *rdev,
> unsigned int mode)
> {
> - struct hi6421_spmi_reg_info *sreg = rdev_get_drvdata(rdev);
> + struct hi6421_spmi_reg_info *sreg;
> unsigned int val;
>
> + sreg = container_of(rdev->desc, struct hi6421_spmi_reg_info, desc);
> switch (mode) {
> case REGULATOR_MODE_NORMAL:
> val = 0;
> @@ -159,7 +160,9 @@ hi6421_spmi_regulator_get_optimum_mode(struct regulator_dev *rdev,
> int input_uV, int output_uV,
> int load_uA)
> {
> - struct hi6421_spmi_reg_info *sreg = rdev_get_drvdata(rdev);
> + struct hi6421_spmi_reg_info *sreg;
> +
> + sreg = container_of(rdev->desc, struct hi6421_spmi_reg_info, desc);
>
> if (!sreg->eco_uA || ((unsigned int)load_uA > sreg->eco_uA))
> return REGULATOR_MODE_NORMAL;
> @@ -252,13 +255,12 @@ static int hi6421_spmi_regulator_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> return -ENOMEM;
>
> mutex_init(&priv->enable_mutex);
> - platform_set_drvdata(pdev, priv);
>
> for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(regulator_info); i++) {
> info = ®ulator_info[i];
>
> config.dev = pdev->dev.parent;
> - config.driver_data = info;
> + config.driver_data = priv;
> config.regmap = pmic->regmap;
>
> rdev = devm_regulator_register(dev, &info->desc, &config);
Thanks,
Mauro
On Wed, 30 Jun 2021 15:42:46 +0800, Axel Lin wrote:
> Since config.dev = pdev->dev.parent in current code, so
> dev_get_drvdata(rdev->dev.parent) actually returns the drvdata of the mfd
> device rather than the regulator. Fix it.
Applied to
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/broonie/regulator.git for-next
Thanks!
[1/1] regulator: hi6421v600: Fix getting wrong drvdata that causes boot failure
commit: 5db5dd5be70eaf808d9fd90174b957fc5c2912cb
All being well this means that it will be integrated into the linux-next
tree (usually sometime in the next 24 hours) and sent to Linus during
the next merge window (or sooner if it is a bug fix), however if
problems are discovered then the patch may be dropped or reverted.
You may get further e-mails resulting from automated or manual testing
and review of the tree, please engage with people reporting problems and
send followup patches addressing any issues that are reported if needed.
If any updates are required or you are submitting further changes they
should be sent as incremental updates against current git, existing
patches will not be replaced.
Please add any relevant lists and maintainers to the CCs when replying
to this mail.
Thanks,
Mark