On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 10:06:22AM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote: > As we augmented the regulator core to accept a GPIO descriptor instead > of a GPIO number, we can augment the fixed GPIO regulator to look up > and pass that descriptor directly from device tree or board GPIO > descriptor look up tables. > > Some boards just auto-enumerate their fixed regulator platform devices > and I have assumed they get names like "fixed-regulator.0" but it's > pretty hard to guess this. I need some testing from board maintainers to > be sure. Other boards are straight forward, using just plain > "fixed-regulator" (ID -1) or "fixed-regulator.1" hammering down the > device ID. > > The OMAP didn't have proper label names on its GPIO chips so I have fixed > this with a separate patch to the GPIO tree, see > commit 088413bc0bd5f5fb66ca22a19d66a49d7154ba4c > "gpio: omap: Give unique labels to each GPIO bank/chip" > > It seems the da9055 and da9211 has never got around to actually passing > any enable gpio into its platform data (not the in-tree code anyway) so we > can just decide to simply pass a descriptor instead. > > The fixed GPIO-controlled regulator in mach-pxa/ezx.c was confusingly named > "*_dummy_supply_device" while it is a very real device backed by a GPIO > line. There is nothing dummy about it at all, so I renamed it with the > infix *_regulator_* as part of this patch set. > > For the patch hunk hitting arch/blackfin I would say I do not expect > testing, review or ACKs anymore so if it works, it works. > > The hunk hitting the x86 BCM43xx driver is especially tricky as the number > comes out of SFI which is a mystery to me. I definately need someone to > look at this. (Hi Andy.) > > Cc: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevche...@linux.intel.com> # Check the x86 BCM > stuff > Cc: Alexander Shiyan <shc_w...@mail.ru> # i.MX boards user > Cc: Haojian Zhuang <haojian.zhu...@gmail.com> # MMP2 maintainer > Cc: Aaro Koskinen <aaro.koski...@iki.fi> # OMAP1 maintainer > Cc: Tony Lindgren <t...@atomide.com> # OMAP1,2,3 maintainer > Cc: Mike Rapoport <r...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> # EM-X270 maintainer > Cc: Robert Jarzmik <robert.jarz...@free.fr> # EZX maintainer > Cc: Philipp Zabel <philipp.za...@gmail.com> # Magician maintainer > Cc: Daniel Mack <zon...@gmail.com> # Raumfeld maintainer > Cc: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyng...@arm.com> # Zeus maintainer > Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+rene...@glider.be> # SuperH pinctrl/GPIO > maintainer > Cc: Russell King <rmk+ker...@armlinux.org.uk> # SA1100 > Signed-off-by: Linus Walleij <linus.wall...@linaro.org> > --- > ChangeLog v2->v3: > - Resending. > ChangeLog v1->v2: > - Rebase the patch on mainline with Blackfin gone and other changes. > - Fix up the new users that appeared in sa1100 > - Drop some suplus comments in x86. > --- > arch/arm/mach-imx/mach-mx21ads.c | 13 +++++++- > arch/arm/mach-imx/mach-mx27ads.c | 12 ++++++- > arch/arm/mach-mmp/brownstone.c | 12 ++++++- > arch/arm/mach-omap1/board-ams-delta.c | 14 +++++++- > arch/arm/mach-omap2/pdata-quirks.c | 16 ++++++++- > arch/arm/mach-pxa/em-x270.c | 1 - > arch/arm/mach-pxa/ezx.c | 33 ++++++++++++------- > arch/arm/mach-pxa/magician.c | 2 +- > arch/arm/mach-pxa/raumfeld.c | 12 +++++-- > arch/arm/mach-pxa/zeus.c | 23 +++++++++++-- > arch/arm/mach-s3c64xx/mach-crag6410.c | 1 - > arch/arm/mach-s3c64xx/mach-smdk6410.c | 1 - > arch/arm/mach-sa1100/assabet.c | 21 ++++++++---- > arch/arm/mach-sa1100/generic.c | 5 +-- > arch/arm/mach-sa1100/generic.h | 3 +- > arch/arm/mach-sa1100/shannon.c | 4 +-- > arch/sh/boards/mach-ecovec24/setup.c | 22 +++++++++++-- > .../intel-mid/device_libs/platform_bcm43xx.c | 17 ++++++++-- > drivers/regulator/fixed-helper.c | 1 - > drivers/regulator/fixed.c | 33 +++++++++---------- > include/linux/regulator/fixed.h | 3 -- > 21 files changed, 187 insertions(+), 62 deletions(-)
This causes an HDMI display regression on Jetson TK1. From what I can
tell, the problem is that we now get a double-inversion for low-active
GPIOs. For example, we have this in the Jetson TK1 device tree:
vdd_hdmi_pll: regulator@11 {
compatible = "regulator-fixed";
reg = <11>;
regulator-name = "+1.05V_RUN_AVDD_HDMI_PLL";
regulator-min-microvolt = <1050000>;
regulator-max-microvolt = <1050000>;
gpio = <&gpio TEGRA_GPIO(H, 7) GPIO_ACTIVE_LOW>;
vin-supply = <&vdd_1v05_run>;
};
We've got GPIO_ACTIVE_LOW for the regulator's enable GPIO and since we
don't have enable-active-high, the regulator core will treat the GPIO as
low active. The presence of the GPIO_ACTIVE_LOW flag will cause the GPIO
polarity to be inversed, transparently in gpiolib, and the lack of the
enable-active-high property causes the GPIO polarity to inversed as
well, so we effectively end up with a high-active enable GPIO for one
which should really be low-active.
This has always been a bit of an ambiguity since we've had two places
for expressing the polarity. But I think given the move to pervasively
using GPIO descriptors, it'd be reasonable to just ignore the
enable-active-high property, or perhaps warn if we stumble across a
low-active GPIO (via the flags in the specifier) if the regulator is
also marked enable-active-high.
> diff --git a/drivers/regulator/fixed.c b/drivers/regulator/fixed.c
> index 988a7472c2ab..1142f195529b 100644
> --- a/drivers/regulator/fixed.c
> +++ b/drivers/regulator/fixed.c
> @@ -24,10 +24,9 @@
> #include <linux/platform_device.h>
> #include <linux/regulator/driver.h>
> #include <linux/regulator/fixed.h>
> -#include <linux/gpio.h>
> +#include <linux/gpio/consumer.h>
> #include <linux/slab.h>
> #include <linux/of.h>
> -#include <linux/of_gpio.h>
> #include <linux/regulator/of_regulator.h>
> #include <linux/regulator/machine.h>
>
> @@ -78,10 +77,6 @@ of_get_fixed_voltage_config(struct device *dev,
> if (init_data->constraints.boot_on)
> config->enabled_at_boot = true;
>
> - config->gpio = of_get_named_gpio(np, "gpio", 0);
> - if ((config->gpio < 0) && (config->gpio != -ENOENT))
> - return ERR_PTR(config->gpio);
> -
> of_property_read_u32(np, "startup-delay-us", &config->startup_delay);
>
> config->enable_high = of_property_read_bool(np, "enable-active-high");
> @@ -102,6 +97,7 @@ static int reg_fixed_voltage_probe(struct platform_device
> *pdev)
> struct fixed_voltage_config *config;
> struct fixed_voltage_data *drvdata;
> struct regulator_config cfg = { };
> + enum gpiod_flags gflags;
> int ret;
>
> drvdata = devm_kzalloc(&pdev->dev, sizeof(struct fixed_voltage_data),
> @@ -150,25 +146,28 @@ static int reg_fixed_voltage_probe(struct
> platform_device *pdev)
>
> drvdata->desc.fixed_uV = config->microvolts;
>
> - if (gpio_is_valid(config->gpio)) {
> - cfg.ena_gpio = config->gpio;
> - if (pdev->dev.of_node)
> - cfg.ena_gpio_initialized = true;
> - }
> cfg.ena_gpio_invert = !config->enable_high;
Change this line to:
cfg.ena_gpio_invert = false;
fixes the regression and is pretty much the implementation of my above
suggestion to ignore enable-active-high, though we may eventually want
to get rid of ena_gpio_invert altogether, provided that everyone has
moved over to GPIO descriptors.
Thierry
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
