Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 3 Jun 2014 15:48:59 +0800 | From | FanWu <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v4] pinctrl: to avoid duplicated calling enable_pinmux_setting for a pin |
| |
On 06/03/2014 03:37 PM, fwu@marvell.com wrote: > From: Fan Wu <fwu@marvell.com> > > What the patch did: > 1.To call pinmux_disable_setting ahead of pinmux_enable_setting in each time of > calling pinctrl_select_state > 2.Remove the HW disable operation in in pinmux_disable_setting function. > 3.Remove the disable ops in struct pinmux_ops > > The reason why to do this is that: > 1.To avoid duplicated calling enable_setting operation without disabling > operation which will let Pin's desc->mux_usecount keep being added. > 2.The HW pin disable operation is not useful for most of the vendors' platform. > And this can be used to avoid the HW glitch after using the item 1# > modification. > > In the following case, the issue can be reproduced: > 1)There is a driver need to switch Pin state dynamicly, E.g. b/t "sleep" and > "default" state > 2)The Pin setting configuration in DTS node may be like the following one: > component a { > pinctrl-names = "default", "sleep"; > pinctrl-0 = <&a_grp_setting &c_grp_setting>; > pinctrl-1 = <&b_grp_setting &c_grp_setting>; > } > The "c_grp_setting" config node is totaly same, maybe like following one: > c_grp_setting: c_grp_setting { > pinctrl-single,pins = <GPIO48 AF6>; > } > 3)When switching the Pin state in the following official Pinctrl sequence: > pin = pinctrl_get(); > state = pinctrl_lookup_state(wanted_state); > pinctrl_select_state(state); > pinctrl_put(); > > According to the comments in the original code, only the setting, in old state > but not in new state, will be "disable"(calling pinmux_disable_setting), which > is correct logic but not intact. We still need consider case that the setting > is in both old state and new state. > We can do this in the following two ways: > 1) Avoid "enable"(calling pinmux_enable_setting) the Same Pins setting repeatedly. > 2) "Disable"(calling pinmux_disable_setting) the "Same Pins setting", actually > two setting instance, ahead of enabling them. > > Analysis: > 1.The solution 2# is better because it can avoid too much iteration. > 2.If we choose 2# solution, we need to > 1) Should mark all the setting in disable state as disabled ahead of enabling. > 2) Avoid the possible HW glitch by removing the HW disable ops in > in the pinmux_disable_setting > If we disable all of the settings in the old state and one/ones of the > setting(s) is/are existed in the new state, the Pin's mux function change > may happen when some SoC vendors defined the "pinctrl-single,function-off" > in their DTS file: > old_setting=>disabled_setting=>new_setting.(HW glitch) > > Signed-off-by: Fan Wu <fwu@marvell.com> > Signed-off-by: Stephen Warren <swarren@nvidia.com> > --- > drivers/pinctrl/core.c | 24 +++++------------------- > drivers/pinctrl/pinmux.c | 4 ---- > include/linux/pinctrl/pinmux.h | 2 -- > 3 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/core.c b/drivers/pinctrl/core.c > index c0fe609..4445a67 100644 > --- a/drivers/pinctrl/core.c > +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/core.c > @@ -989,29 +989,15 @@ int pinctrl_select_state(struct pinctrl *p, struct pinctrl_state *state) > > if (p->state) { > /* > - * The set of groups with a mux configuration in the old state > - * may not be identical to the set of groups with a mux setting > - * in the new state. While this might be unusual, it's entirely > - * possible for the "user"-supplied mapping table to be written > - * that way. For each group that was configured in the old state > - * but not in the new state, this code puts that group into a > - * safe/disabled state. > + * For each pinmux setting in the old state, forget SW's record > + * of mux owner for that pingroup. Any pingroups which are > + * still owned by the new state will be re-acquired by the call > + * to pinmux_enable_setting() in the loop below. > */ > list_for_each_entry(setting, &p->state->settings, node) { > - bool found = false; > if (setting->type != PIN_MAP_TYPE_MUX_GROUP) > continue; > - list_for_each_entry(setting2, &state->settings, node) { > - if (setting2->type != PIN_MAP_TYPE_MUX_GROUP) > - continue; > - if (setting2->data.mux.group == > - setting->data.mux.group) { > - found = true; > - break; > - } > - } > - if (!found) > - pinmux_disable_setting(setting); > + pinmux_disable_setting(setting); > } > } > > diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/pinmux.c b/drivers/pinctrl/pinmux.c > index 9248ce4..c2c4aff 100644 > --- a/drivers/pinctrl/pinmux.c > +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/pinmux.c > @@ -469,7 +469,6 @@ void pinmux_disable_setting(struct pinctrl_setting const *setting) > { > struct pinctrl_dev *pctldev = setting->pctldev; > const struct pinctrl_ops *pctlops = pctldev->desc->pctlops; > - const struct pinmux_ops *ops = pctldev->desc->pmxops; > int ret; > const unsigned *pins; > unsigned num_pins; > @@ -515,9 +514,6 @@ void pinmux_disable_setting(struct pinctrl_setting const *setting) > pins[i], desc->name, gname); > } > } > - > - if (ops->disable) > - ops->disable(pctldev, setting->data.mux.func, setting->data.mux.group); > } > > #ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_FS > diff --git a/include/linux/pinctrl/pinmux.h b/include/linux/pinctrl/pinmux.h > index c153950..3097aaf 100644 > --- a/include/linux/pinctrl/pinmux.h > +++ b/include/linux/pinctrl/pinmux.h > @@ -70,8 +70,6 @@ struct pinmux_ops { > unsigned * const num_groups); > int (*enable) (struct pinctrl_dev *pctldev, unsigned func_selector, > unsigned group_selector); > - void (*disable) (struct pinctrl_dev *pctldev, unsigned func_selector, > - unsigned group_selector); > int (*gpio_request_enable) (struct pinctrl_dev *pctldev, > struct pinctrl_gpio_range *range, > unsigned offset); >
Dear All,
I have updated the patch and the main modification includes: 1.To remove the disable ops in the struct pinmux_ops. 2.To short the patch comments.
Please help to review.
For the "signed-off" part, I added the "Stephen" because I change the code inline comments according to the suggestion from Stephen.
Please share your suggestion about the new version patch.
Great thanks for this!
| |