Re: [PATCH v1 3/3] usb: typec: tcpci_maxim: Enable VSAFE0V signalling

[Badhri Jagan Sridharan]

On Tue, Dec 1, 2020 at 5:16 AM Guenter Roeck <li...@roeck-us.net> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Nov 30, 2020 at 05:32:46PM -0800, Badhri Jagan Sridharan wrote:
> > Unmask EXTENDED_STATUS_MASK.vSafe0V, ALERT.Extended_Status
> > and set vbus_vsafe0v to enable VSAFE0V signalling.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Badhri Jagan Sridharan <bad...@google.com>
> > ---
> >  drivers/usb/typec/tcpm/tcpci_maxim.c | 16 +++++++++++++++-
> >  1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/usb/typec/tcpm/tcpci_maxim.c 
> > b/drivers/usb/typec/tcpm/tcpci_maxim.c
> > index c1797239bf08..1aabe6abd819 100644
> > --- a/drivers/usb/typec/tcpm/tcpci_maxim.c
> > +++ b/drivers/usb/typec/tcpm/tcpci_maxim.c
> > @@ -112,11 +112,18 @@ static void max_tcpci_init_regs(struct max_tcpci_chip 
> > *chip)
> >               return;
> >       }
> >
> > +     /* Enable VSAFE0V detection */
> > +     ret = max_tcpci_write8(chip, TCPC_EXTENDED_STATUS_MASK, 
> > TCPC_EXTENDED_STATUS_VSAFE0V);
> > +     if (ret < 0) {
> > +             dev_err(chip->dev, "Unable to unmask 
> > TCPC_EXTENDED_STATUS_VSAFE0V ret:%d\n", ret);
> > +             return;
> > +     }
> > +
> >       alert_mask = TCPC_ALERT_TX_SUCCESS | TCPC_ALERT_TX_DISCARDED | 
> > TCPC_ALERT_TX_FAILED |
> >               TCPC_ALERT_RX_HARD_RST | TCPC_ALERT_RX_STATUS | 
> > TCPC_ALERT_CC_STATUS |
> >               TCPC_ALERT_VBUS_DISCNCT | TCPC_ALERT_RX_BUF_OVF | 
> > TCPC_ALERT_POWER_STATUS |
> >               /* Enable Extended alert for detecting Fast Role Swap Signal 
> > */
> > -             TCPC_ALERT_EXTND;
> > +             TCPC_ALERT_EXTND | TCPC_ALERT_EXTENDED_STATUS;
> >
> >       ret = max_tcpci_write16(chip, TCPC_ALERT_MASK, alert_mask);
> >       if (ret < 0) {
> > @@ -315,6 +322,12 @@ static irqreturn_t _max_tcpci_irq(struct 
> > max_tcpci_chip *chip, u16 status)
> >               }
> >       }
> >
> > +     if (status & TCPC_ALERT_EXTENDED_STATUS) {
> > +             ret = max_tcpci_read8(chip, TCPC_EXTENDED_STATUS, (u8 
> > *)&reg_status);
> > +             if (ret >= 0 && (reg_status & TCPC_EXTENDED_STATUS_VSAFE0V))
> > +                     tcpm_vbus_change(chip->port);
> > +     }
> > +
> >       if (status & TCPC_ALERT_RX_STATUS)
> >               process_rx(chip, status);
> >
> > @@ -442,6 +455,7 @@ static int max_tcpci_probe(struct i2c_client *client, 
> > const struct i2c_device_id
> >       chip->data.init = tcpci_init;
> >       chip->data.frs_sourcing_vbus = max_tcpci_frs_sourcing_vbus;
> >       chip->data.auto_discharge_disconnect = true;
> > +     chip->data.vbus_vsafe0v = 1;
>
> Why not use true/false ?

Sure. Fixing in v2.

>
> >
> >       max_tcpci_init_regs(chip);
> >       chip->tcpci = tcpci_register_port(chip->dev, &chip->data);
> > --
> > 2.29.2.454.gaff20da3a2-goog
> >