From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1425596AbcBRIoJ (ORCPT ); Thu, 18 Feb 2016 03:44:09 -0500 Received: from regular1.263xmail.com ([211.150.99.140]:42141 "EHLO regular1.263xmail.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965524AbcBRImw (ORCPT ); Thu, 18 Feb 2016 03:42:52 -0500 X-263anti-spam: KSV:0; X-MAIL-GRAY: 0 X-MAIL-DELIVERY: 1 X-KSVirus-check: 0 X-ABS-CHECKED: 4 X-ADDR-CHECKED: 0 X-RL-SENDER: zhangqing@rock-chips.com X-SENDER-IP: 58.22.7.114 X-LOGIN-NAME: zhangqing@rock-chips.com X-UNIQUE-TAG: X-ATTACHMENT-NUM: 0 X-DNS-TYPE: 0 From: Elaine Zhang To: heiko@sntech.de, wxt@rock-chips.com Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, huangtao@rock-chips.com, zyw@rock-chips.com, xxx@rock-chips.com, jay.xu@rock-chips.com, linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Elaine Zhang Subject: [PATCH v2 2/6] rockchip: power-domain: allow domains only handling idle requests Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2016 11:07:14 +0800 Message-Id: <1455764838-12928-3-git-send-email-zhangqing@rock-chips.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 1.9.1 In-Reply-To: <1455764838-12928-1-git-send-email-zhangqing@rock-chips.com> References: <1455764838-12928-1-git-send-email-zhangqing@rock-chips.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On some Rockchip SoC there exist child-domains only handling their idle state with the actual power-state handled by a parent-domain. So allow such types of domains. For them, we can determine their state (on/of) by checking the inverse idle-state instead. There exist one special case if both idle as well power handling were set as not present, but as the domain-data is defined in the code itself, we can expect the reasonable developer to define them So allow such types of domains. For them, we can determine their state (on/of) by checking the inverse idle-state instead. There exist one special case if both idle as well power handling were set as not present, but as the domain-data is defined in the code itself, we can expect the reasonable developer to define them in a correct, without adding more checks. Signed-off-by: Elaine Zhang Signed-off-by: Heiko Stuebner --- drivers/soc/rockchip/pm_domains.c | 11 +++++++++-- 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/soc/rockchip/pm_domains.c b/drivers/soc/rockchip/pm_domains.c index 3dcc611..350527b 100644 --- a/drivers/soc/rockchip/pm_domains.c +++ b/drivers/soc/rockchip/pm_domains.c @@ -68,8 +68,8 @@ struct rockchip_pmu { #define DOMAIN(pwr, status, req, idle, ack) \ { \ - .pwr_mask = BIT(pwr), \ - .status_mask = BIT(status), \ + .pwr_mask = (pwr >= 0) ? BIT(pwr) : OVERFLOW_MASK, \ + .status_mask = (status >= 0) ? BIT(status) : OVERFLOW_MASK,\ .req_mask = (req >= 0) ? BIT(req) : OVERFLOW_MASK, \ .idle_mask = (idle >= 0) ? BIT(idle) : OVERFLOW_MASK, \ .ack_mask = (ack >= 0) ? BIT(ack) : OVERFLOW_MASK, \ @@ -121,6 +121,10 @@ static bool rockchip_pmu_domain_is_on(struct rockchip_pm_domain *pd) struct rockchip_pmu *pmu = pd->pmu; unsigned int val; + /* check idle status for idle-only domains */ + if (pd->info->status_mask >= OVERFLOW_MASK) + return !rockchip_pmu_domain_is_idle(pd); + regmap_read(pmu->regmap, pmu->info->status_offset, &val); /* 1'b0: power on, 1'b1: power off */ @@ -132,6 +136,9 @@ static void rockchip_do_pmu_set_power_domain(struct rockchip_pm_domain *pd, { struct rockchip_pmu *pmu = pd->pmu; + if (pd->info->pwr_mask >= OVERFLOW_MASK) + return; + regmap_update_bits(pmu->regmap, pmu->info->pwr_offset, pd->info->pwr_mask, on ? 0 : -1U); -- 1.9.1