Re: [PATCH 2/2] drivers: thermal: tsens: add timeout to get_tem_tsens_valid

[Ansuel Smith]

On Tue, Sep 07, 2021 at 01:55:03PM -0700, Matthias Kaehlcke wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 05, 2021 at 07:47:08PM +0200, Ansuel Smith wrote:
> > The function can loop and lock the system if for whatever reason the bit
> > for the target sensor is NEVER valid. This is the case if a sensor is
> > disabled by the factory and the valid bit is never reported as actually
> > valid. Add a timeout check and exit if a timeout occurs. As this is
> > a very rare condition, handle the timeout only if the first read fails.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Ansuel Smith <ansuelsmth@xxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >  drivers/thermal/qcom/tsens.c | 23 ++++++++++++++++-------
> >  1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/thermal/qcom/tsens.c b/drivers/thermal/qcom/tsens.c
> > index b1162e566a70..38afde1a599f 100644
> > --- a/drivers/thermal/qcom/tsens.c
> > +++ b/drivers/thermal/qcom/tsens.c
> > @@ -599,6 +599,7 @@ int get_temp_tsens_valid(const struct tsens_sensor *s, int *temp)
> >  	int hw_id = s->hw_id;
> >  	u32 temp_idx = LAST_TEMP_0 + hw_id;
> >  	u32 valid_idx = VALID_0 + hw_id;
> > +	unsigned long timeout;
> >  	u32 valid;
> >  	int ret;
> >  
> > @@ -607,13 +608,21 @@ int get_temp_tsens_valid(const struct tsens_sensor *s, int *temp)
> >  		ret = regmap_field_read(priv->rf[valid_idx], &valid);
> >  		if (ret)
> >  			return ret;
> > -		while (!valid) {
> > -			/* Valid bit is 0 for 6 AHB clock cycles.
> > -			 * At 19.2MHz, 1 AHB clock is ~60ns.
> > -			 * We should enter this loop very, very rarely.
> > -			 */
> > -			ndelay(400);
> > -			ret = regmap_field_read(priv->rf[valid_idx], &valid);
> > +
> > +		if (!valid) {
> > +			timeout = jiffies + msecs_to_jiffies(20);
> > +
> > +			do {
> > +				/* Valid bit is 0 for 6 AHB clock cycles.
> > +				 * At 19.2MHz, 1 AHB clock is ~60ns.
> > +				 * We should enter this loop very, very rarely.
> > +				 */
> > +				ndelay(400);
> > +				ret = regmap_field_read(priv->rf[valid_idx], &valid);
> > +				if (valid || ret)
> > +					break;
> > +			} while (!(ret = time_after_eq(jiffies, timeout)));
> > +
> >  			if (ret)
> >  				return ret;
> 
> With the overloading of 'ret' the return logic is getting a bit more
> convoluted. Also the function should probably return -ETIMEDOUT or
> some other meaningful error if the bit is never valid.
> 
> How about keeping the 'while (!valid)' condition, and adding
> 
> 	if (time_after_eq(jiffies, timeout))
> 		return -ETIMEDOUT;
> 
> inside the loop?
>

I tried to refactor the code using some tag. Hope it's better that way
and thanks for the review. Sending v2.