| Message ID | 20211110115455.18699-1-camel.guo@axis.com |
|---|---|
| State | Superseded |
| Headers | show |
| Series | rtc: rs5c372: Add RTC_VL_READ, RTC_VL_CLR ioctls | expand |
Hello, On 10/11/2021 12:54:54+0100, Camel Guo wrote: > From: Camel Guo <camelg@axis.com> > > In order to make it possible to get battery voltage status, this commit > adds RTC_VL_READ, RTC_VL_CLR ioctl commands to rtc-rs5c372. > > Signed-off-by: Camel Guo <camelg@axis.com> > --- > drivers/rtc/rtc-rs5c372.c | 66 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 66 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/drivers/rtc/rtc-rs5c372.c b/drivers/rtc/rtc-rs5c372.c > index 80980414890c..5a96e5d3663a 100644 > --- a/drivers/rtc/rtc-rs5c372.c > +++ b/drivers/rtc/rtc-rs5c372.c > @@ -485,6 +485,71 @@ static int rs5c372_rtc_proc(struct device *dev, struct seq_file *seq) > #define rs5c372_rtc_proc NULL > #endif > > +#ifdef CONFIG_RTC_INTF_DEV > +static int rs5c372_ioctl(struct device *dev, unsigned int cmd, unsigned long arg) > +{ > + struct rs5c372 *rs5c = i2c_get_clientdata(to_i2c_client(dev)); > + unsigned char ctrl2; > + int addr; > + unsigned int flags; > + > + dev_dbg(dev, "%s: cmd=%x\n", __func__, cmd); > + > + addr = RS5C_ADDR(RS5C_REG_CTRL2); > + ctrl2 = i2c_smbus_read_byte_data(rs5c->client, addr); > + > + switch (cmd) { > + case RTC_VL_READ: > + flags = 0; > + > + switch (rs5c->type) { > + case rtc_r2025sd: > + case rtc_r2221tl: > + if ((rs5c->type == rtc_r2025sd && !(ctrl2 & R2x2x_CTRL2_XSTP)) || > + (rs5c->type == rtc_r2221tl && (ctrl2 & R2x2x_CTRL2_XSTP))) { > + flags |= RTC_VL_DATA_INVALID; > + } > + if (ctrl2 & R2x2x_CTRL2_VDET) > + flags |= RTC_VL_ACCURACY_LOW; Shouldn't that be RTC_VL_BACKUP_LOW? > + break; > + default: > + if (ctrl2 & RS5C_CTRL2_XSTP) > + flags |= RTC_VL_DATA_INVALID; > + break; > + } > + > + return put_user(flags, (unsigned int __user *)arg); > + case RTC_VL_CLR: > + /* clear rtc VDET, PON and XSTP bits */ > + switch (rs5c->type) { > + case rtc_r2025sd: > + case rtc_r2221tl: > + ctrl2 &= ~(R2x2x_CTRL2_VDET | R2x2x_CTRL2_PON); > + if (rs5c->type == rtc_r2025sd) > + ctrl2 |= R2x2x_CTRL2_XSTP; > + else > + ctrl2 &= ~R2x2x_CTRL2_XSTP; > + break; > + default: > + ctrl2 &= ~RS5C_CTRL2_XSTP; You can clear VDET but you must nt clear PON or XSTP as they are used to know whether the time on the RTC has been set correctly. Clearing those can only be done in .set_time. > + break; > + } > + > + if (i2c_smbus_write_byte_data(rs5c->client, addr, ctrl2) < 0) { > + dev_dbg(&rs5c->client->dev, "%s: write error in line %i\n", > + __func__, __LINE__); > + return -EIO; > + } > + return 0; > + default: > + return -ENOIOCTLCMD; > + } > + return 0; > +} > +#else > +#define rs5c372_ioctl NULL > +#endif > + > static const struct rtc_class_ops rs5c372_rtc_ops = { > .proc = rs5c372_rtc_proc, > .read_time = rs5c372_rtc_read_time, > @@ -492,6 +557,7 @@ static const struct rtc_class_ops rs5c372_rtc_ops = { > .read_alarm = rs5c_read_alarm, > .set_alarm = rs5c_set_alarm, > .alarm_irq_enable = rs5c_rtc_alarm_irq_enable, > + .ioctl = rs5c372_ioctl, > }; > > #if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_RTC_INTF_SYSFS) > -- > 2.20.1 >
On 11/10/21 2:54 PM, Alexandre Belloni wrote: > Hello, > > On 10/11/2021 12:54:54+0100, Camel Guo wrote: >> From: Camel Guo <camelg@axis.com> >> >> In order to make it possible to get battery voltage status, this commit >> adds RTC_VL_READ, RTC_VL_CLR ioctl commands to rtc-rs5c372. >> >> Signed-off-by: Camel Guo <camelg@axis.com> >> --- >> drivers/rtc/rtc-rs5c372.c | 66 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> 1 file changed, 66 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/rtc/rtc-rs5c372.c b/drivers/rtc/rtc-rs5c372.c >> index 80980414890c..5a96e5d3663a 100644 >> --- a/drivers/rtc/rtc-rs5c372.c >> +++ b/drivers/rtc/rtc-rs5c372.c >> @@ -485,6 +485,71 @@ static int rs5c372_rtc_proc(struct device *dev, struct seq_file *seq) >> #define rs5c372_rtc_proc NULL >> #endif >> >> +#ifdef CONFIG_RTC_INTF_DEV >> +static int rs5c372_ioctl(struct device *dev, unsigned int cmd, unsigned long arg) >> +{ >> + struct rs5c372 *rs5c = i2c_get_clientdata(to_i2c_client(dev)); >> + unsigned char ctrl2; >> + int addr; >> + unsigned int flags; >> + >> + dev_dbg(dev, "%s: cmd=%x\n", __func__, cmd); >> + >> + addr = RS5C_ADDR(RS5C_REG_CTRL2); >> + ctrl2 = i2c_smbus_read_byte_data(rs5c->client, addr); >> + >> + switch (cmd) { >> + case RTC_VL_READ: >> + flags = 0; >> + >> + switch (rs5c->type) { >> + case rtc_r2025sd: >> + case rtc_r2221tl: >> + if ((rs5c->type == rtc_r2025sd && !(ctrl2 & R2x2x_CTRL2_XSTP)) || >> + (rs5c->type == rtc_r2221tl && (ctrl2 & R2x2x_CTRL2_XSTP))) { >> + flags |= RTC_VL_DATA_INVALID; >> + } >> + if (ctrl2 & R2x2x_CTRL2_VDET) >> + flags |= RTC_VL_ACCURACY_LOW; > > Shouldn't that be RTC_VL_BACKUP_LOW? Some drivers (e.g: rv3029_ioctl and rv8803_ioctl) use RTC_VL_ACCURACY_LOW, but some other drivers (e.g: abx80x_ioctl, pcf2127_rtc_ioctl and pcf8523_rtc_ioctl) use RTC_VL_BACKUP_LOW instead. Is there any guideline or document telling the differences between them? I can change it to RTC_VL_BACKUP_LOW of course. > >> + break; >> + default: >> + if (ctrl2 & RS5C_CTRL2_XSTP) >> + flags |= RTC_VL_DATA_INVALID; >> + break; >> + } >> + >> + return put_user(flags, (unsigned int __user *)arg); >> + case RTC_VL_CLR: >> + /* clear rtc VDET, PON and XSTP bits */ >> + switch (rs5c->type) { >> + case rtc_r2025sd: >> + case rtc_r2221tl: >> + ctrl2 &= ~(R2x2x_CTRL2_VDET | R2x2x_CTRL2_PON); >> + if (rs5c->type == rtc_r2025sd) >> + ctrl2 |= R2x2x_CTRL2_XSTP; >> + else >> + ctrl2 &= ~R2x2x_CTRL2_XSTP; >> + break; >> + default: >> + ctrl2 &= ~RS5C_CTRL2_XSTP; > > You can clear VDET but you must nt clear PON or XSTP as they are used to > know whether the time on the RTC has been set correctly. Clearing those > can only be done in .set_time. Will update shortly. > >> + break; >> + } >> + >> + if (i2c_smbus_write_byte_data(rs5c->client, addr, ctrl2) < 0) { >> + dev_dbg(&rs5c->client->dev, "%s: write error in line %i\n", >> + __func__, __LINE__); >> + return -EIO; >> + } >> + return 0; >> + default: >> + return -ENOIOCTLCMD; >> + } >> + return 0; >> +} >> +#else >> +#define rs5c372_ioctl NULL >> +#endif >> + >> static const struct rtc_class_ops rs5c372_rtc_ops = { >> .proc = rs5c372_rtc_proc, >> .read_time = rs5c372_rtc_read_time, >> @@ -492,6 +557,7 @@ static const struct rtc_class_ops rs5c372_rtc_ops = { >> .read_alarm = rs5c_read_alarm, >> .set_alarm = rs5c_set_alarm, >> .alarm_irq_enable = rs5c_rtc_alarm_irq_enable, >> + .ioctl = rs5c372_ioctl, >> }; >> >> #if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_RTC_INTF_SYSFS) >> -- >> 2.20.1 >> > > -- > Alexandre Belloni, co-owner and COO, Bootlin > Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering > https://bootlin.com
On 10/11/2021 15:03:49+0100, Camel Guo wrote: > > On 10/11/2021 12:54:54+0100, Camel Guo wrote: > > > From: Camel Guo <camelg@axis.com> > > > + switch (cmd) { > > > + case RTC_VL_READ: > > > + flags = 0; > > > + > > > + switch (rs5c->type) { > > > + case rtc_r2025sd: > > > + case rtc_r2221tl: > > > + if ((rs5c->type == rtc_r2025sd && !(ctrl2 & R2x2x_CTRL2_XSTP)) || > > > + (rs5c->type == rtc_r2221tl && (ctrl2 & R2x2x_CTRL2_XSTP))) { > > > + flags |= RTC_VL_DATA_INVALID; > > > + } > > > + if (ctrl2 & R2x2x_CTRL2_VDET) > > > + flags |= RTC_VL_ACCURACY_LOW; > > > > Shouldn't that be RTC_VL_BACKUP_LOW? > > Some drivers (e.g: rv3029_ioctl and rv8803_ioctl) use RTC_VL_ACCURACY_LOW, > but some other drivers (e.g: abx80x_ioctl, pcf2127_rtc_ioctl and > pcf8523_rtc_ioctl) use RTC_VL_BACKUP_LOW instead. Is there any guideline or > document telling the differences between them? > RTC_VL_BACKUP_LOW: The backup voltage is low RTC_VL_ACCURACY_LOW: the primary or backup voltage is low, temperature compensation (or similar) has stopped
Hello, On 11/10/21 3:27 PM, Alexandre Belloni wrote: > On 10/11/2021 15:03:49+0100, Camel Guo wrote: >> > On 10/11/2021 12:54:54+0100, Camel Guo wrote: >> > > From: Camel Guo <camelg@axis.com> >> > > + switch (cmd) { >> > > + case RTC_VL_READ: >> > > + flags = 0; >> > > + >> > > + switch (rs5c->type) { >> > > + case rtc_r2025sd: >> > > + case rtc_r2221tl: >> > > + if ((rs5c->type == rtc_r2025sd && !(ctrl2 & R2x2x_CTRL2_XSTP)) || >> > > + (rs5c->type == rtc_r2221tl && (ctrl2 & R2x2x_CTRL2_XSTP))) { >> > > + flags |= RTC_VL_DATA_INVALID; >> > > + } >> > > + if (ctrl2 & R2x2x_CTRL2_VDET) >> > > + flags |= RTC_VL_ACCURACY_LOW; >> > >> > Shouldn't that be RTC_VL_BACKUP_LOW? >> >> Some drivers (e.g: rv3029_ioctl and rv8803_ioctl) use RTC_VL_ACCURACY_LOW, >> but some other drivers (e.g: abx80x_ioctl, pcf2127_rtc_ioctl and >> pcf8523_rtc_ioctl) use RTC_VL_BACKUP_LOW instead. Is there any guideline or >> document telling the differences between them? >> > > RTC_VL_BACKUP_LOW: The backup voltage is low > RTC_VL_ACCURACY_LOW: the primary or backup voltage is low, temperature > compensation (or similar) has stopped Then I agree that we should go for RTC_VL_BACKUP_LOW. > > -- > Alexandre Belloni, co-owner and COO, Bootlin > Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering > https://bootlin.com
Patch V2 has been uploaded. Please review patch v2 instead. On 11/10/21 3:30 PM, Camel Guo wrote: > Hello, > > On 11/10/21 3:27 PM, Alexandre Belloni wrote: >> On 10/11/2021 15:03:49+0100, Camel Guo wrote: >>> > On 10/11/2021 12:54:54+0100, Camel Guo wrote: >>> > > From: Camel Guo <camelg@axis.com> >>> > > + switch (cmd) { >>> > > + case RTC_VL_READ: >>> > > + flags = 0; >>> > > + >>> > > + switch (rs5c->type) { >>> > > + case rtc_r2025sd: >>> > > + case rtc_r2221tl: >>> > > + if ((rs5c->type == rtc_r2025sd && !(ctrl2 & R2x2x_CTRL2_XSTP)) || >>> > > + (rs5c->type == rtc_r2221tl && (ctrl2 & R2x2x_CTRL2_XSTP))) { >>> > > + flags |= RTC_VL_DATA_INVALID; >>> > > + } >>> > > + if (ctrl2 & R2x2x_CTRL2_VDET) >>> > > + flags |= RTC_VL_ACCURACY_LOW; >>> > >>> > Shouldn't that be RTC_VL_BACKUP_LOW? >>> >>> Some drivers (e.g: rv3029_ioctl and rv8803_ioctl) use RTC_VL_ACCURACY_LOW, >>> but some other drivers (e.g: abx80x_ioctl, pcf2127_rtc_ioctl and >>> pcf8523_rtc_ioctl) use RTC_VL_BACKUP_LOW instead. Is there any guideline or >>> document telling the differences between them? >>> >> >> RTC_VL_BACKUP_LOW: The backup voltage is low >> RTC_VL_ACCURACY_LOW: the primary or backup voltage is low, temperature >> compensation (or similar) has stopped > > Then I agree that we should go for RTC_VL_BACKUP_LOW. > >> >> -- >> Alexandre Belloni, co-owner and COO, Bootlin >> Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering >> https://bootlin.com
On 11/10/21 3:30 PM, Camel Guo wrote: > Hello, > > On 11/10/21 3:27 PM, Alexandre Belloni wrote: >> On 10/11/2021 15:03:49+0100, Camel Guo wrote: >>> > On 10/11/2021 12:54:54+0100, Camel Guo wrote: >>> > > From: Camel Guo <camelg@axis.com> >>> > > + switch (cmd) { >>> > > + case RTC_VL_READ: >>> > > + flags = 0; >>> > > + >>> > > + switch (rs5c->type) { >>> > > + case rtc_r2025sd: >>> > > + case rtc_r2221tl: >>> > > + if ((rs5c->type == rtc_r2025sd && !(ctrl2 & R2x2x_CTRL2_XSTP)) || >>> > > + (rs5c->type == rtc_r2221tl && (ctrl2 & R2x2x_CTRL2_XSTP))) { >>> > > + flags |= RTC_VL_DATA_INVALID; >>> > > + } >>> > > + if (ctrl2 & R2x2x_CTRL2_VDET) >>> > > + flags |= RTC_VL_ACCURACY_LOW; >>> > >>> > Shouldn't that be RTC_VL_BACKUP_LOW? Fixed in V3. >>> >>> Some drivers (e.g: rv3029_ioctl and rv8803_ioctl) use RTC_VL_ACCURACY_LOW, >>> but some other drivers (e.g: abx80x_ioctl, pcf2127_rtc_ioctl and >>> pcf8523_rtc_ioctl) use RTC_VL_BACKUP_LOW instead. Is there any guideline or >>> document telling the differences between them? >>> >> >> RTC_VL_BACKUP_LOW: The backup voltage is low >> RTC_VL_ACCURACY_LOW: the primary or backup voltage is low, temperature >> compensation (or similar) has stopped > > Then I agree that we should go for RTC_VL_BACKUP_LOW. Fixed in V3. > >> >> -- >> Alexandre Belloni, co-owner and COO, Bootlin >> Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering >> https://bootlin.com All comments are fixed in V3, please review it again.
diff --git a/drivers/rtc/rtc-rs5c372.c b/drivers/rtc/rtc-rs5c372.c index 80980414890c..5a96e5d3663a 100644 --- a/drivers/rtc/rtc-rs5c372.c +++ b/drivers/rtc/rtc-rs5c372.c @@ -485,6 +485,71 @@ static int rs5c372_rtc_proc(struct device *dev, struct seq_file *seq) #define rs5c372_rtc_proc NULL #endif +#ifdef CONFIG_RTC_INTF_DEV +static int rs5c372_ioctl(struct device *dev, unsigned int cmd, unsigned long arg) +{ + struct rs5c372 *rs5c = i2c_get_clientdata(to_i2c_client(dev)); + unsigned char ctrl2; + int addr; + unsigned int flags; + + dev_dbg(dev, "%s: cmd=%x\n", __func__, cmd); + + addr = RS5C_ADDR(RS5C_REG_CTRL2); + ctrl2 = i2c_smbus_read_byte_data(rs5c->client, addr); + + switch (cmd) { + case RTC_VL_READ: + flags = 0; + + switch (rs5c->type) { + case rtc_r2025sd: + case rtc_r2221tl: + if ((rs5c->type == rtc_r2025sd && !(ctrl2 & R2x2x_CTRL2_XSTP)) || + (rs5c->type == rtc_r2221tl && (ctrl2 & R2x2x_CTRL2_XSTP))) { + flags |= RTC_VL_DATA_INVALID; + } + if (ctrl2 & R2x2x_CTRL2_VDET) + flags |= RTC_VL_ACCURACY_LOW; + break; + default: + if (ctrl2 & RS5C_CTRL2_XSTP) + flags |= RTC_VL_DATA_INVALID; + break; + } + + return put_user(flags, (unsigned int __user *)arg); + case RTC_VL_CLR: + /* clear rtc VDET, PON and XSTP bits */ + switch (rs5c->type) { + case rtc_r2025sd: + case rtc_r2221tl: + ctrl2 &= ~(R2x2x_CTRL2_VDET | R2x2x_CTRL2_PON); + if (rs5c->type == rtc_r2025sd) + ctrl2 |= R2x2x_CTRL2_XSTP; + else + ctrl2 &= ~R2x2x_CTRL2_XSTP; + break; + default: + ctrl2 &= ~RS5C_CTRL2_XSTP; + break; + } + + if (i2c_smbus_write_byte_data(rs5c->client, addr, ctrl2) < 0) { + dev_dbg(&rs5c->client->dev, "%s: write error in line %i\n", + __func__, __LINE__); + return -EIO; + } + return 0; + default: + return -ENOIOCTLCMD; + } + return 0; +} +#else +#define rs5c372_ioctl NULL +#endif + static const struct rtc_class_ops rs5c372_rtc_ops = { .proc = rs5c372_rtc_proc, .read_time = rs5c372_rtc_read_time, @@ -492,6 +557,7 @@ static const struct rtc_class_ops rs5c372_rtc_ops = { .read_alarm = rs5c_read_alarm, .set_alarm = rs5c_set_alarm, .alarm_irq_enable = rs5c_rtc_alarm_irq_enable, + .ioctl = rs5c372_ioctl, }; #if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_RTC_INTF_SYSFS)