Re: [PATCH] usb: typec: tcpci: add alert.fault handling
Heikki Krogerus <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | org.kernel.vger.linux-usb,org.kernel.vger.linux-kernel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Wed, Aug 05, 2026 at 03:45:20PM +0200, Marco Felsch wrote: > On 26-08-05, Heikki Krogerus wrote: > > On Fri, Jul 31, 2026 at 10:34:59AM +0200, Marco Felsch wrote: > > > Add minimal handling to clear the ALERT.Fault bit which may be set in > > > case of an over-current or over-voltage detection. At the moment only > > > the IRQ clear support is added since the TCPC Spec mentions that the > > > handling of such events is vendor specific. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Marco Felsch <[email protected]> > > > --- > > > drivers/usb/typec/tcpm/tcpci.c | 16 +++++++++++++++- > > > 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/usb/typec/tcpm/tcpci.c b/drivers/usb/typec/tcpm/tcpci.c > > > index a56e31b20c21..d2d5bf7ca618 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/usb/typec/tcpm/tcpci.c > > > +++ b/drivers/usb/typec/tcpm/tcpci.c > > > @@ -692,7 +692,8 @@ static int tcpci_init(struct tcpc_dev *tcpc) > > > > > > reg = TCPC_ALERT_TX_SUCCESS | TCPC_ALERT_TX_FAILED | > > > TCPC_ALERT_TX_DISCARDED | TCPC_ALERT_RX_STATUS | > > > - TCPC_ALERT_RX_HARD_RST | TCPC_ALERT_CC_STATUS; > > > + TCPC_ALERT_RX_HARD_RST | TCPC_ALERT_CC_STATUS | > > > + TCPC_ALERT_FAULT; > > > if (tcpci->controls_vbus) > > > reg |= TCPC_ALERT_POWER_STATUS; > > > /* Enable VSAFE0V status interrupt when detecting VSAFE0V is supported */ > > > @@ -720,6 +721,19 @@ irqreturn_t tcpci_irq(struct tcpci *tcpci) > > > irq_ret = status & tcpci->alert_mask; > > > > > > process_status: > > > + /* > > > + * Handle nested fault before clearing the alert status to not > > > + * re-trigger a fault alert immediately again. > > > + */ > > > > Shouldn't that explanation in the comment be also in the commit > > message? That sounds like the "why" part to me. > > I don't think so, it's just a comment for $dev that this ordering is > important. The commit message clearly states that an over-current or > over-voltage may trigger this. Fair enough. Let's wait for Badhri, but FWIW: Acked-by: Heikki Krogerus <[email protected]> -- heikki