Re: [PATCH 4/7] soc/tegra: pmc: Add interface to set voltage of IO rails

[Laxman Dewangan <ldewangan@nvidia.com>]

On Friday 15 April 2016 10:11 PM, Stephen Warren wrote:
> On 04/15/2016 10:21 AM, Laxman Dewangan wrote:
>>
>> On Friday 15 April 2016 09:54 PM, Stephen Warren wrote:
>>> On 04/12/2016 08:56 AM, Laxman Dewangan wrote:
>>>> NVIDIA Tegra210 supports some of the IO interface which can operate
>>>> at 1.8V or 3.3V I/O rail voltage levels. SW needs to configure
>>>> Tegra PMC register to set different voltage level of IO interface 
>>>> based
>>>> on IO rail voltage from power supply i.e. power regulators.
>>>>
>>>> Add APIs to set and get IO rail voltage from the client driver.
>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/soc/tegra/pmc.c b/drivers/soc/tegra/pmc.c
>>>
>>>> +static struct tegra_io_rail_voltage_bit_info
>>>> tegra210_io_rail_voltage_info[] = {
>>>> +    TEGRA_IO_RAIL_VOLTAGE(SDMMC1, 12),
>>>> +    TEGRA_IO_RAIL_VOLTAGE(SDMMC3, 13),
>>>> +    TEGRA_IO_RAIL_VOLTAGE(AUDIO_HV, 18),
>>>> +    TEGRA_IO_RAIL_VOLTAGE(DMIC, 20),
>>>> +    TEGRA_IO_RAIL_VOLTAGE(GPIO, 21),
>>>> +    TEGRA_IO_RAIL_VOLTAGE(SPI_HV, 23),
>>>> +};
>>>
>>> That table is likely specific to Tegra210, yet ...
>>>
>>>> +static int tegra_io_rail_voltage_get_bit_pos(int io_rail_id)
>>>> +int tegra_io_rail_voltage_set(int io_rail, int val)
>>>> +int tegra_io_rail_voltage_get(int io_rail)
>>>
>>> ... these functions are all named as if they are generic. Presumably
>>> they will indeed be needed for the next chip too? How will you prevent
>>> their use, or turn these functions into no-ops, or return errors, on
>>> other SoCs?
>>
>> It will return error for the Soc which does to support or the parameter
>> to the apis which are not applicable.
>
> Are you saying that will happen in the current code? I don't see where 
> there's anything that validates that.
>
> Or does "will" mean "I will do that in the next patch revision"?

I have code like this in this patch


+int tegra_pmc_pad_voltage_update(unsigned long offset, unsigned long mask,
+                                unsigned long val)
+{
+       unsigned long flags;
+
+       if (!pmc->soc->has_pad_voltage_config)
+               return -ENODEV;
+


So this flag is try only for T210 and all previous chip has false setting.