Re: [PATCH v3 1/3] ACPI / PMIC: support PMIC operation region for CrystalCove

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

On Friday, November 21, 2014 03:11:49 PM Aaron Lu wrote:
> The Baytrail-T platform firmware has defined two customized operation
> regions for PMIC chip Crystal Cove - one is for power resource handling
> and one is for thermal: sensor temperature reporting, trip point setting,
> etc. This patch adds support for them on top of the existing Crystal Cove
> PMIC driver.
> 
> The reason to split code into a separate file intel_pmic.c is that there
> are more PMIC drivers with ACPI operation region support coming and we can
> re-use those code. The intel_pmic_opregion_data structure is created also
> for this purpose: when we need to support a new PMIC's operation region,
> we just need to fill those callbacks and the two register mapping tables.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Aaron Lu <aaron.lu@xxxxxxxxx>
> Acked-by: Lee Jones <lee.jones@xxxxxxxxxx> for the MFD part

Thanks for resending, looks better to me.

Some nitpicking below.

> ---
>  drivers/acpi/Kconfig               |  17 ++
>  drivers/acpi/Makefile              |   3 +
>  drivers/acpi/pmic/intel_pmic.c     | 339 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  drivers/acpi/pmic/intel_pmic.h     |  34 ++++
>  drivers/acpi/pmic/intel_pmic_crc.c | 216 +++++++++++++++++++++++
>  drivers/mfd/intel_soc_pmic_crc.c   |   3 +
>  6 files changed, 612 insertions(+)
>  create mode 100644 drivers/acpi/pmic/intel_pmic.c
>  create mode 100644 drivers/acpi/pmic/intel_pmic.h
>  create mode 100644 drivers/acpi/pmic/intel_pmic_crc.c
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/Kconfig b/drivers/acpi/Kconfig
> index 79078b8f5697..3e5f2056f946 100644
> --- a/drivers/acpi/Kconfig
> +++ b/drivers/acpi/Kconfig
> @@ -393,4 +393,21 @@ config ACPI_EXTLOG
>  	  driver adds support for that functionality with corresponding
>  	  tracepoint which carries that information to userspace.
>  
> +menuconfig PMIC_OPREGION
> +	bool "PMIC (Power Management Integrated Circuit) operation region support"
> +	help
> +	  Select this option to enable support for ACPI operation
> +	  region of the PMIC chip. The operation region can be used
> +	  to control power rails and sensor reading/writing on the
> +	  PMIC chip.
> +
> +if PMIC_OPREGION
> +config CRC_PMIC_OPREGION

If that is the only possible choice for PMIC_OPREGION, it should be selected
automatically.  Alternatively, PMIC_OPREGION should be selected automatically
if CRC_PMIC_OPREGION is set.

> +	bool "ACPI operation region support for CrystalCove PMIC"
> +	depends on INTEL_SOC_PMIC
> +	help
> +	  This config adds ACPI operation region support for CrystalCove PMIC.
> +
> +endif
> +
>  endif	# ACPI
> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/Makefile b/drivers/acpi/Makefile
> index 6d11522f0e48..f5938399ac14 100644
> --- a/drivers/acpi/Makefile
> +++ b/drivers/acpi/Makefile
> @@ -88,3 +88,6 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_ACPI_PROCESSOR_AGGREGATOR) += acpi_pad.o
>  obj-$(CONFIG_ACPI_APEI)		+= apei/
>  
>  obj-$(CONFIG_ACPI_EXTLOG)	+= acpi_extlog.o
> +
> +obj-$(CONFIG_PMIC_OPREGION)	+= pmic/intel_pmic.o
> +obj-$(CONFIG_CRC_PMIC_OPREGION) += pmic/intel_pmic_crc.o
> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/pmic/intel_pmic.c b/drivers/acpi/pmic/intel_pmic.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 000000000000..5dbc0fb4d536
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/drivers/acpi/pmic/intel_pmic.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,339 @@
> +/*
> + * intel_pmic.c - Intel PMIC operation region driver
> + *
> + * Copyright (C) 2014 Intel Corporation. All rights reserved.
> + *
> + * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or
> + * modify it under the terms of the GNU General Public License version
> + * 2 as published by the Free Software Foundation.
> + *
> + * This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
> + * but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
> + * MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.  See the
> + * GNU General Public License for more details.
> + */
> +
> +#include <linux/module.h>
> +#include <linux/acpi.h>
> +#include <linux/regmap.h>
> +#include "intel_pmic.h"
> +
> +#define PMIC_PMOP_OPREGION_ID		0x8d
> +#define PMIC_THERMAL_OPREGION_ID	0x8c
> +
> +struct acpi_lpat {
> +	int temp;
> +	int raw;
> +};
> +
> +struct intel_pmic_opregion {
> +	struct mutex lock;
> +	struct acpi_lpat *lpat;
> +	int lpat_count;
> +	struct regmap *regmap;
> +	struct intel_pmic_opregion_data *data;
> +};
> +
> +static struct pmic_pwr_reg *
> +pmic_get_pwr_reg(int address, struct pmic_pwr_table *table, int count)
> +{
> +	int i;
> +
> +	for (i = 0; i < count; i++) {
> +		if (table[i].address == address)
> +			return &table[i].pwr_reg;
> +	}
> +	return NULL;
> +}
> +
> +static int
> +pmic_get_thermal_reg(int address, struct pmic_thermal_table *table, int count)
> +{
> +	int i;
> +
> +	for (i = 0; i < count; i++) {
> +		if (table[i].address == address)
> +			return table[i].reg;
> +	}
> +	return -ENOENT;
> +}

This is slightly inconsistent.  While pmic_get_pwr_reg() returns a pointer
to struct pmic_pwr_reg, this one returns an int.

I see that this is because the definitions of struct pmic_thermal_table
and struct pmic_pwr_table are inconsistent, but is that really necessary?

You could define

struct pmic_table {
	int address;	/* operation region address */
	int reg;	/* corresponding PMIC register */
	int bit;	/* control bit for power */
};

and use it for both power and thermal.  [The latter will not use the bit field,
but is that really a problem?]

It looks like some code duplication might be reduced this way.

Besides, "power" looks better than "pwr", especially that you use "thermal"
instead of "thrm" (for example).

> +
> +/* Return temperature from raw value through LPAT table */
> +static int raw_to_temp(struct acpi_lpat *lpat, int count, int raw)
> +{
> +	int i, delta_temp, delta_raw, temp;
> +
> +	for (i = 0; i < count - 1; i++) {
> +		if ((raw >= lpat[i].raw && raw <= lpat[i+1].raw) ||
> +		    (raw <= lpat[i].raw && raw >= lpat[i+1].raw))
> +			break;
> +	}
> +
> +	if (i == count - 1)
> +		return -ENOENT;
> +
> +	delta_temp = lpat[i+1].temp - lpat[i].temp;
> +	delta_raw = lpat[i+1].raw - lpat[i].raw;
> +	temp = lpat[i].temp + (raw - lpat[i].raw) * delta_temp / delta_raw;
> +
> +	return temp;
> +}
> +
> +/* Return raw value from temperature through LPAT table */
> +static int temp_to_raw(struct acpi_lpat *lpat, int count, int temp)
> +{
> +	int i, delta_temp, delta_raw, raw;
> +
> +	for (i = 0; i < count - 1; i++) {
> +		if (temp >= lpat[i].temp && temp <= lpat[i+1].temp)
> +			break;
> +	}
> +
> +	if (i == count - 1)
> +		return -ENOENT;
> +
> +	delta_temp = lpat[i+1].temp - lpat[i].temp;
> +	delta_raw = lpat[i+1].raw - lpat[i].raw;
> +	raw = lpat[i].raw + (temp - lpat[i].temp) * delta_raw / delta_temp;
> +
> +	return raw;
> +}
> +
> +static void
> +pmic_thermal_lpat(struct intel_pmic_opregion *opregion, acpi_handle handle,
> +		  struct device *dev)
> +{
> +	struct acpi_buffer buffer = { ACPI_ALLOCATE_BUFFER, NULL };
> +	union acpi_object *obj_p, *obj_e;
> +	int *lpat, i;
> +	acpi_status status;
> +
> +	status = acpi_evaluate_object(handle, "LPAT", NULL, &buffer);
> +	if (ACPI_FAILURE(status))
> +		return;
> +
> +	obj_p = (union acpi_object *)buffer.pointer;
> +	if (!obj_p || (obj_p->type != ACPI_TYPE_PACKAGE) ||
> +	    (obj_p->package.count % 2) || (obj_p->package.count < 4))
> +		goto out;
> +
> +	lpat = devm_kmalloc(dev, sizeof(*lpat) * obj_p->package.count,
> +			    GFP_KERNEL);

This looks fishy.

Of course, sizeof(*lpat) is the same as sizeof(int), but is more obfuscated
and you're allocating memory for an array of integers.

> +	if (!lpat)
> +		goto out;
> +
> +	for (i = 0; i < obj_p->package.count; i++) {
> +		obj_e = &obj_p->package.elements[i];
> +		if (obj_e->type != ACPI_TYPE_INTEGER)

lpat[] has to be freed here.

> +			goto out;
> +		lpat[i] = obj_e->integer.value;

Here, integer.value is generally u64, so I'd use an explicit cast to s64 before
casting that to int.  Otherwise it looks like you've forgotten about possible
overflows, which I assume is not the case.

> +	}
> +
> +	opregion->lpat = (struct acpi_lpat *)lpat;
> +	opregion->lpat_count = obj_p->package.count / 2;
> +
> +out:
> +	kfree(buffer.pointer);
> +}
> +
> +static acpi_status
> +intel_pmic_pmop_handler(u32 function, acpi_physical_address address,
> +			u32 bits, u64 *value64, void *handler_context,
> +			void *region_context)
> +{
> +	struct intel_pmic_opregion *opregion = region_context;
> +	struct regmap *regmap = opregion->regmap;
> +	struct intel_pmic_opregion_data *d = opregion->data;
> +	struct pmic_pwr_reg *preg;
> +	int result;
> +
> +	if (bits != 32 || !value64)
> +		return AE_BAD_PARAMETER;
> +
> +	if (function == ACPI_WRITE && !(*value64 == 0 || *value64 == 1))
> +		return AE_BAD_PARAMETER;
> +
> +	preg = pmic_get_pwr_reg(address, d->pwr_table, d->pwr_table_count);
> +	if (!preg)
> +		return AE_BAD_PARAMETER;
> +
> +	mutex_lock(&opregion->lock);
> +
> +	if (function == ACPI_READ)
> +		result = d->get_power(regmap, preg, value64);
> +	else
> +		result = d->update_power(regmap, preg, *value64 == 1);

I'd write that as

	retult = function == ACPI_READ ?
		d->get_power(regmap, preg, value64) :
		d->update_power(regmap, preg, *value64 == 1);

which will be consistent with the "return" statement below.

> +
> +	mutex_unlock(&opregion->lock);
> +
> +	return result ? AE_ERROR : AE_OK;
> +}
> +
> +static acpi_status pmic_read_temp(struct intel_pmic_opregion *opregion,
> +				  int reg, u64 *value)
> +{
> +	int raw_temp, temp;
> +
> +	if (!opregion->data->get_raw_temp)
> +		return AE_BAD_PARAMETER;
> +
> +	raw_temp = opregion->data->get_raw_temp(opregion->regmap, reg);
> +	if (raw_temp < 0)
> +		return AE_ERROR;
> +
> +	if (!opregion->lpat) {
> +		*value = raw_temp;
> +		return AE_OK;
> +	}
> +
> +	temp = raw_to_temp(opregion->lpat, opregion->lpat_count, raw_temp);
> +	if (temp < 0)
> +		return AE_ERROR;
> +
> +	*value = temp;
> +	return AE_OK;
> +}
> +
> +static acpi_status pmic_thermal_temp(struct intel_pmic_opregion *opregion,
> +				     int reg, u32 function, u64 *value)
> +{
> +	if (function != ACPI_READ)
> +		return AE_BAD_PARAMETER;
> +
> +	return pmic_read_temp(opregion, reg, value);

What about

	return function == ACPI_READ ?
		pmic_read_temp(opregion, reg, value) : AE_BAD_PARAMETER;

?

> +}
> +
> +static acpi_status pmic_thermal_aux(struct intel_pmic_opregion *opregion,
> +				    int reg, u32 function, u64 *value)
> +{
> +	int raw_temp;
> +
> +	if (function == ACPI_READ)
> +		return pmic_read_temp(opregion, reg, value);
> +
> +	if (!opregion->data->update_aux)
> +		return AE_BAD_PARAMETER;
> +
> +	if (opregion->lpat) {
> +		raw_temp = temp_to_raw(opregion->lpat, opregion->lpat_count,
> +					 *value);
> +		if (raw_temp < 0)
> +			return AE_ERROR;
> +	} else {
> +		raw_temp = *value;
> +	}
> +
> +	return opregion->data->update_aux(opregion->regmap, reg, raw_temp) ?
> +		AE_ERROR : AE_OK;

You seem to be casting all error codes into AE_ERROR here.  Should the function
simply return int and pass the original error code to the caller instead?

> +}
> +
> +static acpi_status pmic_thermal_pen(struct intel_pmic_opregion *opregion,
> +				    int reg, u32 function, u64 *value)
> +{
> +	struct intel_pmic_opregion_data *d = opregion->data;
> +	struct regmap *regmap = opregion->regmap;
> +
> +	if (!d->get_policy || !d->update_policy)
> +		return AE_BAD_PARAMETER;
> +
> +	if (function == ACPI_READ)
> +		return d->get_policy(regmap, reg, value) ? AE_ERROR : AE_OK;
> +
> +	if (*value != 0 || *value != 1)
> +		return AE_BAD_PARAMETER;
> +
> +	return d->update_policy(regmap, reg, *value) ? AE_ERROR : AE_OK;

Well, same here.

> +}
> +
> +static bool pmic_thermal_is_temp(int address)
> +{
> +	return (address <= 0x3c) && !(address % 12);
> +}
> +
> +static bool pmic_thermal_is_aux(int address)
> +{
> +	return (address >= 4 && address <= 0x40 && !((address - 4) % 12)) ||
> +	       (address >= 8 && address <= 0x44 && !((address - 8) % 12));
> +}
> +
> +static bool pmic_thermal_is_pen(int address)
> +{
> +	return address >= 0x48 && address <= 0x5c;
> +}
> +
> +static acpi_status
> +intel_pmic_thermal_handler(u32 function, acpi_physical_address address,
> +			   u32 bits, u64 *value64, void *handler_context,
> +			   void *region_context)
> +{
> +	struct intel_pmic_opregion *opregion = region_context;
> +	int reg;
> +	int result;
> +
> +	if (bits != 32 || !value64)
> +		return AE_BAD_PARAMETER;
> +
> +	reg = pmic_get_thermal_reg(address, opregion->data->thermal_table,
> +				   opregion->data->thermal_table_count);
> +	if (!reg)
> +		return AE_BAD_PARAMETER;
> +
> +	mutex_lock(&opregion->lock);
> +
> +	result = AE_BAD_PARAMETER;
> +	if (pmic_thermal_is_temp(address))
> +		result = pmic_thermal_temp(opregion, reg, function, value64);
> +	else if (pmic_thermal_is_aux(address))
> +		result = pmic_thermal_aux(opregion, reg, function, value64);
> +	else if (pmic_thermal_is_pen(address))
> +		result = pmic_thermal_pen(opregion, reg, function, value64);
> +
> +	mutex_unlock(&opregion->lock);
> +
> +	return result;
> +}
> +
> +int intel_pmic_install_opregion_handler(struct device *dev, acpi_handle handle,
> +					struct regmap *regmap,
> +					struct intel_pmic_opregion_data *d)
> +{
> +	acpi_status status;
> +	struct intel_pmic_opregion *opregion;
> +
> +	if (!dev || !regmap || !d)
> +		return -EINVAL;
> +
> +	if (!handle)
> +		return -ENODEV;
> +
> +	opregion = devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof(*opregion), GFP_KERNEL);
> +	if (!opregion)
> +		return -ENOMEM;
> +
> +	mutex_init(&opregion->lock);
> +	opregion->regmap = regmap;
> +	pmic_thermal_lpat(opregion, handle, dev);
> +
> +	status = acpi_install_address_space_handler(handle,
> +						    PMIC_PMOP_OPREGION_ID,
> +						    intel_pmic_pmop_handler,
> +						    NULL, opregion);
> +	if (ACPI_FAILURE(status))
> +		return -ENODEV;

And you return a int from here.

Would it make sense for the majority of functions in this file to return ints
rather than acpi_status values?

> +
> +	status = acpi_install_address_space_handler(handle,
> +						    PMIC_THERMAL_OPREGION_ID,
> +						    intel_pmic_thermal_handler,
> +						    NULL, opregion);
> +	if (ACPI_FAILURE(status)) {
> +		acpi_remove_address_space_handler(handle, PMIC_PMOP_OPREGION_ID,
> +						  intel_pmic_pmop_handler);
> +		return -ENODEV;
> +	}
> +
> +	opregion->data = d;

I guess the opregion will never be removed, right?

> +	return 0;
> +}
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(intel_pmic_install_opregion_handler);
> +
> +MODULE_LICENSE("GPL");
> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/pmic/intel_pmic.h b/drivers/acpi/pmic/intel_pmic.h
> new file mode 100644
> index 000000000000..18b9bb80f8b6
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/drivers/acpi/pmic/intel_pmic.h
> @@ -0,0 +1,34 @@
> +#ifndef __INTEL_PMIC_H
> +#define __INTEL_PMIC_H
> +
> +struct pmic_pwr_reg {
> +	int reg;	/* corresponding PMIC register */
> +	int bit;	/* control bit for power */
> +};
> +
> +struct pmic_pwr_table {
> +	int address;	/* operation region address */
> +	struct pmic_pwr_reg pwr_reg;
> +};
> +
> +struct pmic_thermal_table {
> +	int address;	/* operation region address */
> +	int reg;	/* corresponding thermal register */
> +};
> +
> +struct intel_pmic_opregion_data {
> +	int (*get_power)(struct regmap *r, struct pmic_pwr_reg *preg, u64 *value);
> +	int (*update_power)(struct regmap *r, struct pmic_pwr_reg *preg, bool on);
> +	int (*get_raw_temp)(struct regmap *r, int reg);
> +	int (*update_aux)(struct regmap *r, int reg, int raw_temp);
> +	int (*get_policy)(struct regmap *r, int reg, u64 *value);
> +	int (*update_policy)(struct regmap *r, int reg, int enable);
> +	struct pmic_pwr_table *pwr_table;
> +	int pwr_table_count;
> +	struct pmic_thermal_table *thermal_table;
> +	int thermal_table_count;
> +};
> +
> +int intel_pmic_install_opregion_handler(struct device *dev, acpi_handle handle, struct regmap *regmap, struct intel_pmic_opregion_data *d);
> +
> +#endif
> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/pmic/intel_pmic_crc.c b/drivers/acpi/pmic/intel_pmic_crc.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 000000000000..7629f16d1526
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/drivers/acpi/pmic/intel_pmic_crc.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,216 @@
> +/*
> + * intel_pmic_crc.c - Intel CrystalCove PMIC operation region driver
> + *
> + * Copyright (C) 2014 Intel Corporation. All rights reserved.
> + *
> + * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or
> + * modify it under the terms of the GNU General Public License version
> + * 2 as published by the Free Software Foundation.
> + *
> + * This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
> + * but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
> + * MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.  See the
> + * GNU General Public License for more details.
> + */
> +
> +#include <linux/module.h>
> +#include <linux/acpi.h>
> +#include <linux/mfd/intel_soc_pmic.h>
> +#include <linux/regmap.h>
> +#include <linux/platform_device.h>
> +#include "intel_pmic.h"
> +
> +#define PWR_SOURCE_SELECT	BIT(1)
> +
> +#define PMIC_A0LOCK_REG		0xc5
> +
> +static struct pmic_pwr_table pwr_table[] = {
> +	{
> +		.address = 0x24,
> +		.pwr_reg = {
> +			.reg = 0x66,
> +			.bit = 0x00,
> +		},
> +	},	/* X285 -> V2P85SX, camara */
> +	{
> +		.address = 0x48,
> +		.pwr_reg = {
> +			.reg = 0x5d,
> +			.bit = 0x00,
> +		},
> +	},	/* V18X -> V1P8SX, eMMC/camara/audio */
> +};
> +
> +static struct pmic_thermal_table thermal_table[] = {
> +	{
> +		.address = 0x00,
> +		.reg = 0x75
> +	},	/* TMP0 -> SYS0_THRM_RSLT_L */
> +	{
> +		.address = 0x04,
> +		.reg = 0x95
> +	},	/* AX00 -> SYS0_THRMALRT0_L */
> +	{
> +		.address = 0x08,
> +		.reg = 0x97
> +	},	/* AX01 -> SYS0_THRMALRT1_L */
> +	{
> +		.address = 0x0c,
> +		.reg = 0x77
> +	},	/* TMP1 -> SYS1_THRM_RSLT_L */
> +	{
> +		.address = 0x10,
> +		.reg = 0x9a
> +	},	/* AX10 -> SYS1_THRMALRT0_L */
> +	{
> +		.address = 0x14,
> +		.reg = 0x9c
> +	},	/* AX11 -> SYS1_THRMALRT1_L */
> +	{
> +		.address = 0x18,
> +		.reg = 0x79
> +	},	/* TMP2 -> SYS2_THRM_RSLT_L */
> +	{
> +		.address = 0x1c,
> +		.reg = 0x9f
> +	},	/* AX20 -> SYS2_THRMALRT0_L */
> +	{
> +		.address = 0x20,
> +		.reg = 0xa1
> +	},	/* AX21 -> SYS2_THRMALRT1_L */
> +	{
> +		.address = 0x48,
> +		.reg = 0x94
> +	},	/* PEN0 -> SYS0_THRMALRT0_H */
> +	{
> +		.address = 0x4c,
> +		.reg = 0x99
> +	},	/* PEN1 -> SYS1_THRMALRT1_H */
> +	{
> +		.address = 0x50,
> +		.reg = 0x9e
> +	},	/* PEN2 -> SYS2_THRMALRT2_H */
> +};
> +
> +static int intel_crc_pmic_get_power(struct regmap *regmap,
> +				    struct pmic_pwr_reg *preg, u64 *value)
> +{
> +	int data;
> +
> +	if (regmap_read(regmap, preg->reg, &data))
> +		return -EIO;
> +
> +	*value = (data & PWR_SOURCE_SELECT) && (data & BIT(preg->bit)) ? 1 : 0;
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int intel_crc_pmic_update_power(struct regmap *regmap,
> +				       struct pmic_pwr_reg *preg, bool on)
> +{
> +	int data;
> +
> +	if (regmap_read(regmap, preg->reg, &data))
> +		return -EIO;
> +
> +	if (on) {
> +		data |= PWR_SOURCE_SELECT | BIT(preg->bit);
> +	} else {
> +		data &= ~BIT(preg->bit);
> +		data |= PWR_SOURCE_SELECT;
> +	}
> +
> +	if (regmap_write(regmap, preg->reg, data))
> +		return -EIO;
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
> +/* Raw temperature value is 10bits: 8bits in reg and 2bits in reg-1 bit0,1 */

Proper kerneldoc, please.  Here and elsewhere where it makes sense.

All functions that aren't static need to have kerneldoc comments.

> +static int intel_crc_pmic_get_raw_temp(struct regmap *regmap, int reg)
> +{
> +	int temp_l, temp_h;
> +
> +	if (regmap_read(regmap, reg, &temp_l) ||
> +	    regmap_read(regmap, reg - 1, &temp_h))
> +		return -EIO;
> +
> +	return (temp_l | ((temp_h & 0x3) << 8));

At least one paren is not necessary here.

> +}
> +
> +static int
> +intel_crc_pmic_update_aux(struct regmap *regmap, int reg, int raw)
> +{
> +	if (regmap_write(regmap, reg, raw) ||
> +	    regmap_update_bits(regmap, reg - 1, 0x3, raw >> 8))
> +		return -EIO;
> +
> +	return 0;

What about

	return regmap_write(regmap, reg, raw) ||
		regmap_update_bits(regmap, reg - 1, 0x3, raw >> 8) ? -EIO : 0;

> +}
> +
> +static int
> +intel_crc_pmic_get_policy(struct regmap *regmap, int reg, u64 *value)
> +{
> +	int pen;
> +
> +	if (regmap_read(regmap, reg, &pen))
> +		return -EIO;
> +	*value = pen >> 7;
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int intel_crc_pmic_update_policy(struct regmap *regmap,
> +					int reg, int enable)
> +{
> +	int alert0;
> +
> +	/* Update to policy enable bit requires unlocking a0lock */
> +	if (regmap_read(regmap, PMIC_A0LOCK_REG, &alert0))
> +		return -EIO;

Empty line here?

> +	if (regmap_update_bits(regmap, PMIC_A0LOCK_REG, 0x01, 0))
> +		return -EIO;
> +
> +	if (regmap_update_bits(regmap, reg, 0x80, enable << 7))
> +		return -EIO;
> +
> +	/* restore alert0 */
> +	if (regmap_write(regmap, PMIC_A0LOCK_REG, alert0))
> +		return -EIO;
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static struct intel_pmic_opregion_data intel_crc_pmic_opregion_data = {
> +	.get_power	= intel_crc_pmic_get_power,
> +	.update_power	= intel_crc_pmic_update_power,
> +	.get_raw_temp	= intel_crc_pmic_get_raw_temp,
> +	.update_aux	= intel_crc_pmic_update_aux,
> +	.get_policy	= intel_crc_pmic_get_policy,
> +	.update_policy	= intel_crc_pmic_update_policy,
> +	.pwr_table	= pwr_table,
> +	.pwr_table_count= ARRAY_SIZE(pwr_table),
> +	.thermal_table	= thermal_table,
> +	.thermal_table_count = ARRAY_SIZE(thermal_table),
> +};
> +
> +static int intel_crc_pmic_opregion_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> +{
> +	struct intel_soc_pmic *pmic = dev_get_drvdata(pdev->dev.parent);
> +	return intel_pmic_install_opregion_handler(&pdev->dev,
> +			ACPI_HANDLE(pdev->dev.parent), pmic->regmap,
> +			&intel_crc_pmic_opregion_data);
> +}
> +
> +static struct platform_driver intel_crc_pmic_opregion_driver = {
> +	.probe = intel_crc_pmic_opregion_probe,
> +	.driver = {
> +		.name = "crystal_cove_region",
> +	},
> +};
> +
> +static int __init intel_crc_pmic_opregion_driver_init(void)
> +{
> +	return platform_driver_register(&intel_crc_pmic_opregion_driver);
> +}
> +module_init(intel_crc_pmic_opregion_driver_init);
> +
> +MODULE_DESCRIPTION("CrystalCove ACPI opration region driver");
> +MODULE_LICENSE("GPL");
> diff --git a/drivers/mfd/intel_soc_pmic_crc.c b/drivers/mfd/intel_soc_pmic_crc.c
> index 7107cab832e6..48845d636bba 100644
> --- a/drivers/mfd/intel_soc_pmic_crc.c
> +++ b/drivers/mfd/intel_soc_pmic_crc.c
> @@ -106,6 +106,9 @@ static struct mfd_cell crystal_cove_dev[] = {
>  		.num_resources = ARRAY_SIZE(gpio_resources),
>  		.resources = gpio_resources,
>  	},
> +	{
> +		.name = "crystal_cove_region",
> +	},
>  };
>  
>  static struct regmap_config crystal_cove_regmap_config = {
> 

-- 
I speak only for myself.
Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/