Re: [PATCH] RTC: RK808: Work around hardware bug on November 31st

[Chris Zhong]

On 12/07/2015 10:52 AM, Doug Anderson wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Sun, Dec 6, 2015 at 6:50 PM, Doug Anderson <dianders@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Chris,
> >
> > On Sun, Dec 6, 2015 at 5:33 PM, Chris Zhong <zyw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > Hi Doug
> > >
> > > RK808 has a shadowed register for saving a "frozen" RTC time.
> > > When we setting "GET_TIME" to 1, the time will save in this shadowed
> > > register. So if we do not set the "GET_TIME", we always get the last time.
> > >
> > > read the old time before "get_time", and then read the time again for new
> > > time. If the old time earlier than 12.1 && new time later than 12.1, we
> > > should
> > > +1 day for the correct rtc time.
> > >
> > > On the other hand, we should set the "GET_TIME" after rk808_rtc_set_time,
> > > for restore the time before suspend/shut_down.
> > Ah, good idea using the shadow registers.  The whole point of the
> > shadow registers is to enable atomic read of time, right?  So if the
> > clock ticks as you are reading 23:59:59 you don't end up reading
> > 23:59:00 or 24:59:59 (you'll get either 23:59:59 or 24:00:00).  So
> > right, time read will now be:
> >
> > 1. Read GET_TIME.  Confirm it's 1.
> > 2. Read the time.
> > 3. Set GET_TIME to 0.
> > 4. Set GET_TIME to 1.
> > 5. Read the time.
> >
> > If time from #2 < 11/31 and time from #5 >= 11/31 then we do the
> > adjust.  If GET_TIME wasn't 1 in step #1 then we won't do any
> > adjusting unless the time is actually 11/31.
> >
> > Between steps #4 and #5 we'll need to add a small delay since old code
> > used to use the setting to 0 as a delay (as commented).
> >
> > We should presumably always leave GET_TIME as 1 unless we're actively
> > reading the time for the most reliability.  Also, if we've already
> > read the time this bootup, we can certainly optimize the above by
> > skipping #1 and #2.
GET_TIME: Rising transition of this register transfers dynamic registers 
into
static shadowed registers.
So only the rising of GET_TIME would update the "static shadowed registers".
We only need ensure that the rising occurs on condition that we want to the
really time.
> Oh, but also we still need to know whether to adjust the alarm.  I
> think you said that all existing rk808 chips have this bug and that
> you'll set a bit (to be determined later) if/when this bug is fixed.
> So we still need to assume that all rk808 chips have this bug...
I think so, all rk808 chips have this bug. And we can read the version 
register
to differentiate the PMICs, once this bug is fixed.
> -Doug


--
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/