This patch removes the requirement for an IRQ, because for the core
functionality IRQ isn't needed. So this makes the DA9061/62 chip
useable for designs which haven't connected the IRQ pin.
Signed-off-by: Christoph Niedermaier <[email protected]>
---
Cc: Support Opensource <[email protected]>
Cc: Lee Jones <[email protected]>
Cc: Adam Thomson <[email protected]>
Cc: Liam Girdwood <[email protected]>
Cc: Mark Brown <[email protected]>
Cc: Marek Vasut <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
---
V2: - Rebase on current next 20230209
- Add Lee Jones to Cc list
---
drivers/mfd/da9062-core.c | 98 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------
1 file changed, 73 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/mfd/da9062-core.c b/drivers/mfd/da9062-core.c
index 40cde51e5719..caa597400dd1 100644
--- a/drivers/mfd/da9062-core.c
+++ b/drivers/mfd/da9062-core.c
@@ -212,6 +212,27 @@ static const struct mfd_cell da9061_devs[] = {
},
};
+static const struct mfd_cell da9061_devs_without_irq[] = {
+ {
+ .name = "da9061-core",
+ },
+ {
+ .name = "da9062-regulators",
+ },
+ {
+ .name = "da9061-watchdog",
+ .of_compatible = "dlg,da9061-watchdog",
+ },
+ {
+ .name = "da9061-thermal",
+ .of_compatible = "dlg,da9061-thermal",
+ },
+ {
+ .name = "da9061-onkey",
+ .of_compatible = "dlg,da9061-onkey",
+ },
+};
+
static const struct resource da9062_core_resources[] = {
DEFINE_RES_NAMED(DA9062_IRQ_VDD_WARN, 1, "VDD_WARN", IORESOURCE_IRQ),
};
@@ -288,6 +309,35 @@ static const struct mfd_cell da9062_devs[] = {
},
};
+static const struct mfd_cell da9062_devs_without_irq[] = {
+ {
+ .name = "da9062-core",
+ },
+ {
+ .name = "da9062-regulators",
+ },
+ {
+ .name = "da9062-watchdog",
+ .of_compatible = "dlg,da9062-watchdog",
+ },
+ {
+ .name = "da9062-thermal",
+ .of_compatible = "dlg,da9062-thermal",
+ },
+ {
+ .name = "da9062-rtc",
+ .of_compatible = "dlg,da9062-rtc",
+ },
+ {
+ .name = "da9062-onkey",
+ .of_compatible = "dlg,da9062-onkey",
+ },
+ {
+ .name = "da9062-gpio",
+ .of_compatible = "dlg,da9062-gpio",
+ },
+};
+
static int da9062_clear_fault_log(struct da9062 *chip)
{
int ret;
@@ -625,7 +675,7 @@ static int da9062_i2c_probe(struct i2c_client *i2c)
{
const struct i2c_device_id *id = i2c_client_get_device_id(i2c);
struct da9062 *chip;
- unsigned int irq_base;
+ unsigned int irq_base = 0;
const struct mfd_cell *cell;
const struct regmap_irq_chip *irq_chip;
const struct regmap_config *config;
@@ -645,21 +695,16 @@ static int da9062_i2c_probe(struct i2c_client *i2c)
i2c_set_clientdata(i2c, chip);
chip->dev = &i2c->dev;
- if (!i2c->irq) {
- dev_err(chip->dev, "No IRQ configured\n");
- return -EINVAL;
- }
-
switch (chip->chip_type) {
case COMPAT_TYPE_DA9061:
- cell = da9061_devs;
- cell_num = ARRAY_SIZE(da9061_devs);
+ cell = i2c->irq ? da9061_devs : da9061_devs_without_irq;
+ cell_num = i2c->irq ? ARRAY_SIZE(da9061_devs) : ARRAY_SIZE(da9061_devs_without_irq);
irq_chip = &da9061_irq_chip;
config = &da9061_regmap_config;
break;
case COMPAT_TYPE_DA9062:
- cell = da9062_devs;
- cell_num = ARRAY_SIZE(da9062_devs);
+ cell = i2c->irq ? da9062_devs : da9062_devs_without_irq;
+ cell_num = i2c->irq ? ARRAY_SIZE(da9062_devs) : ARRAY_SIZE(da9062_devs_without_irq);
irq_chip = &da9062_irq_chip;
config = &da9062_regmap_config;
break;
@@ -695,29 +740,32 @@ static int da9062_i2c_probe(struct i2c_client *i2c)
if (ret)
return ret;
- ret = da9062_configure_irq_type(chip, i2c->irq, &trigger_type);
- if (ret < 0) {
- dev_err(chip->dev, "Failed to configure IRQ type\n");
- return ret;
- }
+ if (i2c->irq) {
+ ret = da9062_configure_irq_type(chip, i2c->irq, &trigger_type);
+ if (ret < 0) {
+ dev_err(chip->dev, "Failed to configure IRQ type\n");
+ return ret;
+ }
- ret = regmap_add_irq_chip(chip->regmap, i2c->irq,
- trigger_type | IRQF_SHARED | IRQF_ONESHOT,
- -1, irq_chip, &chip->regmap_irq);
- if (ret) {
- dev_err(chip->dev, "Failed to request IRQ %d: %d\n",
- i2c->irq, ret);
- return ret;
- }
+ ret = regmap_add_irq_chip(chip->regmap, i2c->irq,
+ trigger_type | IRQF_SHARED | IRQF_ONESHOT,
+ -1, irq_chip, &chip->regmap_irq);
+ if (ret) {
+ dev_err(chip->dev, "Failed to request IRQ %d: %d\n",
+ i2c->irq, ret);
+ return ret;
+ }
- irq_base = regmap_irq_chip_get_base(chip->regmap_irq);
+ irq_base = regmap_irq_chip_get_base(chip->regmap_irq);
+ }
ret = mfd_add_devices(chip->dev, PLATFORM_DEVID_NONE, cell,
cell_num, NULL, irq_base,
NULL);
if (ret) {
dev_err(chip->dev, "Cannot register child devices\n");
- regmap_del_irq_chip(i2c->irq, chip->regmap_irq);
+ if (i2c->irq)
+ regmap_del_irq_chip(i2c->irq, chip->regmap_irq);
return ret;
}
--
2.11.0
This patch makes the use of IRQ optional to make the DA9061/62 usable
for designs that don't have the IRQ pin connected, because the regulator
is usable without IRQ.
Signed-off-by: Christoph Niedermaier <[email protected]>
Acked-by: Mark Brown <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Adam Ward <[email protected]>
---
Cc: Support Opensource <[email protected]>
Cc: Adam Thomson <[email protected]>
Cc: Liam Girdwood <[email protected]>
Cc: Mark Brown <[email protected]>
Cc: Marek Vasut <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
---
V2: - Rebase on current next 20230209
- Add Reviewed-by and Acked-by tags
---
drivers/regulator/da9062-regulator.c | 7 +++----
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/regulator/da9062-regulator.c b/drivers/regulator/da9062-regulator.c
index 1a6324001027..653e1844dd61 100644
--- a/drivers/regulator/da9062-regulator.c
+++ b/drivers/regulator/da9062-regulator.c
@@ -1012,10 +1012,9 @@ static int da9062_regulator_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
}
/* LDOs overcurrent event support */
- irq = platform_get_irq_byname(pdev, "LDO_LIM");
- if (irq < 0)
- return irq;
- regulators->irq_ldo_lim = irq;
+ regulators->irq_ldo_lim = platform_get_irq_byname_optional(pdev, "LDO_LIM");
+ if (regulators->irq_ldo_lim < 0)
+ return 0;
ret = devm_request_threaded_irq(&pdev->dev, irq,
NULL, da9062_ldo_lim_event,
--
2.11.0
On 2/9/23 11:51, Christoph Niedermaier wrote:
> This patch removes the requirement for an IRQ, because for the core
> functionality IRQ isn't needed. So this makes the DA9061/62 chip
> useable for designs which haven't connected the IRQ pin.
>
> Signed-off-by: Christoph Niedermaier <[email protected]>
> ---
> Cc: Support Opensource <[email protected]>
> Cc: Lee Jones <[email protected]>
> Cc: Adam Thomson <[email protected]>
> Cc: Liam Girdwood <[email protected]>
> Cc: Mark Brown <[email protected]>
> Cc: Marek Vasut <[email protected]>
> Cc: [email protected]
> Cc: [email protected]
> To: [email protected]
> ---
> V2: - Rebase on current next 20230209
> - Add Lee Jones to Cc list
Reviewed-by: Marek Vasut <[email protected]>
On 2/9/23 11:51, Christoph Niedermaier wrote:
> This patch removes the requirement for an IRQ, because for the core
> functionality IRQ isn't needed. So this makes the DA9061/62 chip
> useable for designs which haven't connected the IRQ pin.
>
> Signed-off-by: Christoph Niedermaier <[email protected]>
> ---
> Cc: Support Opensource <[email protected]>
> Cc: Lee Jones <[email protected]>
> Cc: Adam Thomson <[email protected]>
> Cc: Liam Girdwood <[email protected]>
> Cc: Mark Brown <[email protected]>
> Cc: Marek Vasut <[email protected]>
> Cc: [email protected]
> Cc: [email protected]
> To: [email protected]
> ---
> V2: - Rebase on current next 20230209
> - Add Lee Jones to Cc list
Thanks!
Reviewed-by: Adam Ward <[email protected]>
On Thu, 09 Feb 2023, Christoph Niedermaier wrote:
> This patch removes the requirement for an IRQ, because for the core
> functionality IRQ isn't needed. So this makes the DA9061/62 chip
> useable for designs which haven't connected the IRQ pin.
>
> Signed-off-by: Christoph Niedermaier <[email protected]>
> ---
> Cc: Support Opensource <[email protected]>
> Cc: Lee Jones <[email protected]>
> Cc: Adam Thomson <[email protected]>
> Cc: Liam Girdwood <[email protected]>
> Cc: Mark Brown <[email protected]>
> Cc: Marek Vasut <[email protected]>
> Cc: [email protected]
> Cc: [email protected]
> To: [email protected]
> ---
> V2: - Rebase on current next 20230209
> - Add Lee Jones to Cc list
> ---
> drivers/mfd/da9062-core.c | 98 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------
> 1 file changed, 73 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/mfd/da9062-core.c b/drivers/mfd/da9062-core.c
> index 40cde51e5719..caa597400dd1 100644
> --- a/drivers/mfd/da9062-core.c
> +++ b/drivers/mfd/da9062-core.c
> @@ -212,6 +212,27 @@ static const struct mfd_cell da9061_devs[] = {
> },
> };
>
> +static const struct mfd_cell da9061_devs_without_irq[] = {
"_noirq"
> + {
> + .name = "da9061-core",
> + },
> + {
> + .name = "da9062-regulators",
> + },
Place the one line entries on one line please.
Even better, use MFD_CELL_NAME()
> + {
> + .name = "da9061-watchdog",
> + .of_compatible = "dlg,da9061-watchdog",
> + },
MFD_CELL_OF(<name>, NULL, NULL, NULL, 0, <compatible>);
> + {
> + .name = "da9061-thermal",
> + .of_compatible = "dlg,da9061-thermal",
> + },
> + {
> + .name = "da9061-onkey",
> + .of_compatible = "dlg,da9061-onkey",
> + },
> +};
> +
> static const struct resource da9062_core_resources[] = {
> DEFINE_RES_NAMED(DA9062_IRQ_VDD_WARN, 1, "VDD_WARN", IORESOURCE_IRQ),
> };
> @@ -288,6 +309,35 @@ static const struct mfd_cell da9062_devs[] = {
> },
> };
>
> +static const struct mfd_cell da9062_devs_without_irq[] = {
> + {
> + .name = "da9062-core",
> + },
> + {
> + .name = "da9062-regulators",
> + },
> + {
> + .name = "da9062-watchdog",
> + .of_compatible = "dlg,da9062-watchdog",
> + },
> + {
> + .name = "da9062-thermal",
> + .of_compatible = "dlg,da9062-thermal",
> + },
> + {
> + .name = "da9062-rtc",
> + .of_compatible = "dlg,da9062-rtc",
> + },
> + {
> + .name = "da9062-onkey",
> + .of_compatible = "dlg,da9062-onkey",
> + },
> + {
> + .name = "da9062-gpio",
> + .of_compatible = "dlg,da9062-gpio",
> + },
> +};
As above.
> static int da9062_clear_fault_log(struct da9062 *chip)
> {
> int ret;
> @@ -625,7 +675,7 @@ static int da9062_i2c_probe(struct i2c_client *i2c)
> {
> const struct i2c_device_id *id = i2c_client_get_device_id(i2c);
> struct da9062 *chip;
> - unsigned int irq_base;
> + unsigned int irq_base = 0;
> const struct mfd_cell *cell;
> const struct regmap_irq_chip *irq_chip;
> const struct regmap_config *config;
> @@ -645,21 +695,16 @@ static int da9062_i2c_probe(struct i2c_client *i2c)
> i2c_set_clientdata(i2c, chip);
> chip->dev = &i2c->dev;
>
> - if (!i2c->irq) {
> - dev_err(chip->dev, "No IRQ configured\n");
> - return -EINVAL;
> - }
> -
> switch (chip->chip_type) {
> case COMPAT_TYPE_DA9061:
> - cell = da9061_devs;
> - cell_num = ARRAY_SIZE(da9061_devs);
> + cell = i2c->irq ? da9061_devs : da9061_devs_without_irq;
> + cell_num = i2c->irq ? ARRAY_SIZE(da9061_devs) : ARRAY_SIZE(da9061_devs_without_irq);
This is hideous.
Why not just NULLify the resources below instead?
> irq_chip = &da9061_irq_chip;
> config = &da9061_regmap_config;
> break;
> case COMPAT_TYPE_DA9062:
> - cell = da9062_devs;
> - cell_num = ARRAY_SIZE(da9062_devs);
> + cell = i2c->irq ? da9062_devs : da9062_devs_without_irq;
> + cell_num = i2c->irq ? ARRAY_SIZE(da9062_devs) : ARRAY_SIZE(da9062_devs_without_irq);
> irq_chip = &da9062_irq_chip;
Still setting this despite no IRQs?
> config = &da9062_regmap_config;
> break;
__
_||_
\ /
\/
[...]
if (i2c->irq <= 0)
cell->resources = NULL;
cell->num_resources = 0;
> @@ -695,29 +740,32 @@ static int da9062_i2c_probe(struct i2c_client *i2c)
> if (ret)
> return ret;
>
> - ret = da9062_configure_irq_type(chip, i2c->irq, &trigger_type);
> - if (ret < 0) {
> - dev_err(chip->dev, "Failed to configure IRQ type\n");
> - return ret;
> - }
> + if (i2c->irq) {
> + ret = da9062_configure_irq_type(chip, i2c->irq, &trigger_type);
> + if (ret < 0) {
> + dev_err(chip->dev, "Failed to configure IRQ type\n");
> + return ret;
> + }
>
> - ret = regmap_add_irq_chip(chip->regmap, i2c->irq,
> - trigger_type | IRQF_SHARED | IRQF_ONESHOT,
> - -1, irq_chip, &chip->regmap_irq);
> - if (ret) {
> - dev_err(chip->dev, "Failed to request IRQ %d: %d\n",
> - i2c->irq, ret);
> - return ret;
> - }
> + ret = regmap_add_irq_chip(chip->regmap, i2c->irq,
> + trigger_type | IRQF_SHARED | IRQF_ONESHOT,
> + -1, irq_chip, &chip->regmap_irq);
> + if (ret) {
> + dev_err(chip->dev, "Failed to request IRQ %d: %d\n",
> + i2c->irq, ret);
> + return ret;
> + }
>
> - irq_base = regmap_irq_chip_get_base(chip->regmap_irq);
> + irq_base = regmap_irq_chip_get_base(chip->regmap_irq);
> + }
>
> ret = mfd_add_devices(chip->dev, PLATFORM_DEVID_NONE, cell,
> cell_num, NULL, irq_base,
> NULL);
> if (ret) {
> dev_err(chip->dev, "Cannot register child devices\n");
> - regmap_del_irq_chip(i2c->irq, chip->regmap_irq);
> + if (i2c->irq)
> + regmap_del_irq_chip(i2c->irq, chip->regmap_irq);
> return ret;
> }
>
> --
> 2.11.0
>
--
Lee Jones [李琼斯]
From: Lee Jones [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Friday, March 3, 2023 9:42 AM
>
> On Thu, 09 Feb 2023, Christoph Niedermaier wrote:
>
>> This patch removes the requirement for an IRQ, because for the core
>> functionality IRQ isn't needed. So this makes the DA9061/62 chip
>> useable for designs which haven't connected the IRQ pin.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Christoph Niedermaier <[email protected]>
>> ---
>> Cc: Support Opensource <[email protected]>
>> Cc: Lee Jones <[email protected]>
>> Cc: Adam Thomson <[email protected]>
>> Cc: Liam Girdwood <[email protected]>
>> Cc: Mark Brown <[email protected]>
>> Cc: Marek Vasut <[email protected]>
>> Cc: [email protected]
>> Cc: [email protected]
>> To: [email protected]
>> ---
>> V2: - Rebase on current next 20230209
>> - Add Lee Jones to Cc list
>> ---
>> drivers/mfd/da9062-core.c | 98 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------
>> 1 file changed, 73 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/mfd/da9062-core.c b/drivers/mfd/da9062-core.c
>> index 40cde51e5719..caa597400dd1 100644
>> --- a/drivers/mfd/da9062-core.c
>> +++ b/drivers/mfd/da9062-core.c
>> @@ -212,6 +212,27 @@ static const struct mfd_cell da9061_devs[] = {
>> },
>> };
>>
>> +static const struct mfd_cell da9061_devs_without_irq[] = {
>
> "_noirq"
>
>> + {
>> + .name = "da9061-core",
>> + },
>> + {
>> + .name = "da9062-regulators",
>> + },
>
> Place the one line entries on one line please.
>
> Even better, use MFD_CELL_NAME()
>
>> + {
>> + .name = "da9061-watchdog",
>> + .of_compatible = "dlg,da9061-watchdog",
>> + },
>
> MFD_CELL_OF(<name>, NULL, NULL, NULL, 0, <compatible>);
>
I will convert all to MFD_CELL_NAME() in version 3.
>> + {
>> + .name = "da9061-thermal",
>> + .of_compatible = "dlg,da9061-thermal",
>> + },
>> + {
>> + .name = "da9061-onkey",
>> + .of_compatible = "dlg,da9061-onkey",
>> + },
>> +};
>> +
>> static const struct resource da9062_core_resources[] = {
>> DEFINE_RES_NAMED(DA9062_IRQ_VDD_WARN, 1, "VDD_WARN", IORESOURCE_IRQ),
>> };
>> @@ -288,6 +309,35 @@ static const struct mfd_cell da9062_devs[] = {
>> },
>> };
>>
>> +static const struct mfd_cell da9062_devs_without_irq[] = {
>> + {
>> + .name = "da9062-core",
>> + },
>> + {
>> + .name = "da9062-regulators",
>> + },
>> + {
>> + .name = "da9062-watchdog",
>> + .of_compatible = "dlg,da9062-watchdog",
>> + },
>> + {
>> + .name = "da9062-thermal",
>> + .of_compatible = "dlg,da9062-thermal",
>> + },
>> + {
>> + .name = "da9062-rtc",
>> + .of_compatible = "dlg,da9062-rtc",
>> + },
>> + {
>> + .name = "da9062-onkey",
>> + .of_compatible = "dlg,da9062-onkey",
>> + },
>> + {
>> + .name = "da9062-gpio",
>> + .of_compatible = "dlg,da9062-gpio",
>> + },
>> +};
>
> As above.
>
I will convert all to MFD_CELL_NAME() in version 3.
>> static int da9062_clear_fault_log(struct da9062 *chip)
>> {
>> int ret;
>> @@ -625,7 +675,7 @@ static int da9062_i2c_probe(struct i2c_client *i2c)
>> {
>> const struct i2c_device_id *id = i2c_client_get_device_id(i2c);
>> struct da9062 *chip;
>> - unsigned int irq_base;
>> + unsigned int irq_base = 0;
>> const struct mfd_cell *cell;
>> const struct regmap_irq_chip *irq_chip;
>> const struct regmap_config *config;
>> @@ -645,21 +695,16 @@ static int da9062_i2c_probe(struct i2c_client *i2c)
>> i2c_set_clientdata(i2c, chip);
>> chip->dev = &i2c->dev;
>>
>> - if (!i2c->irq) {
>> - dev_err(chip->dev, "No IRQ configured\n");
>> - return -EINVAL;
>> - }
>> -
>> switch (chip->chip_type) {
>> case COMPAT_TYPE_DA9061:
>> - cell = da9061_devs;
>> - cell_num = ARRAY_SIZE(da9061_devs);
>> + cell = i2c->irq ? da9061_devs : da9061_devs_without_irq;
>> + cell_num = i2c->irq ? ARRAY_SIZE(da9061_devs) : ARRAY_SIZE(da9061_devs_without_irq);
>
> This is hideous.
>
> Why not just NULLify the resources below instead?
>
>> irq_chip = &da9061_irq_chip;
>> config = &da9061_regmap_config;
>> break;
>> case COMPAT_TYPE_DA9062:
>> - cell = da9062_devs;
>> - cell_num = ARRAY_SIZE(da9062_devs);
>> + cell = i2c->irq ? da9062_devs : da9062_devs_without_irq;
>> + cell_num = i2c->irq ? ARRAY_SIZE(da9062_devs) : ARRAY_SIZE(da9062_devs_without_irq);
> > irq_chip = &da9062_irq_chip;
>
> Still setting this despite no IRQs?
I will take it into account in version 3.
>
>> config = &da9062_regmap_config;
>> break;
> __
> _||_
> \ /
> \/
>
> [...]
>
> if (i2c->irq <= 0)
> cell->resources = NULL;
> cell->num_resources = 0;
But it is an array. I then have to go through it completely and check
if it is related to IRQ. I will try to refactor the my code to be less
hideous and send a version 3.
>
>> @@ -695,29 +740,32 @@ static int da9062_i2c_probe(struct i2c_client *i2c)
>> if (ret)
>> return ret;
>>
>> - ret = da9062_configure_irq_type(chip, i2c->irq, &trigger_type);
>> - if (ret < 0) {
>> - dev_err(chip->dev, "Failed to configure IRQ type\n");
>> - return ret;
>> - }
>> + if (i2c->irq) {
>> + ret = da9062_configure_irq_type(chip, i2c->irq, &trigger_type);
>> + if (ret < 0) {
>> + dev_err(chip->dev, "Failed to configure IRQ type\n");
>> + return ret;
>> + }
>>
>> - ret = regmap_add_irq_chip(chip->regmap, i2c->irq,
>> - trigger_type | IRQF_SHARED | IRQF_ONESHOT,
>> - -1, irq_chip, &chip->regmap_irq);
>> - if (ret) {
>> - dev_err(chip->dev, "Failed to request IRQ %d: %d\n",
>> - i2c->irq, ret);
>> - return ret;
>> - }
>> + ret = regmap_add_irq_chip(chip->regmap, i2c->irq,
>> + trigger_type | IRQF_SHARED | IRQF_ONESHOT,
>> + -1, irq_chip, &chip->regmap_irq);
>> + if (ret) {
>> + dev_err(chip->dev, "Failed to request IRQ %d: %d\n",
>> + i2c->irq, ret);
>> + return ret;
>> + }
>>
>> - irq_base = regmap_irq_chip_get_base(chip->regmap_irq);
>> + irq_base = regmap_irq_chip_get_base(chip->regmap_irq);
>> + }
>>
>> ret = mfd_add_devices(chip->dev, PLATFORM_DEVID_NONE, cell,
>> cell_num, NULL, irq_base,
>> NULL);
>> if (ret) {
>> dev_err(chip->dev, "Cannot register child devices\n");
>> - regmap_del_irq_chip(i2c->irq, chip->regmap_irq);
>> + if (i2c->irq)
>> + regmap_del_irq_chip(i2c->irq, chip->regmap_irq);
>> return ret;
>> }
>>
Regards
Christoph