x86-power-control

James Feist james.feist at linux.intel.com
Wed Oct 23 04:56:10 AEDT 2019


On 10/22/19 10:46 AM, Vijay Khemka wrote:
> 
> 
> On 10/22/19, 10:16 AM, "openbmc on behalf of Bills, Jason M" <openbmc-bounces+vijaykhemka=fb.com at lists.ozlabs.org on behalf of jason.m.bills at linux.intel.com> wrote:
> 
>      
>      
>      On 10/21/2019 6:15 PM, Vijay Khemka wrote:
>      >
>      >
>      > On 10/21/19, 4:04 PM, "Bills, Jason M" <jason.m.bills at linux.intel.com> wrote:
>      >
>      >
>      >
>      >      On 10/18/2019 4:04 PM, Vijay Khemka wrote:
>      >      >
>      >      >
>      >      > On 10/18/19, 11:02 AM, "openbmc on behalf of Bills, Jason M" <openbmc-bounces+vijaykhemka=fb.com at lists.ozlabs.org on behalf of jason.m.bills at linux.intel.com> wrote:
>      >      >
>      >      >
>      >      >
>      >      >      On 10/17/2019 4:52 PM, Vijay Khemka wrote:
>      >      >      >
>      >      >      >
>      >      >      > On 10/17/19, 4:27 PM, "openbmc on behalf of Bills, Jason M" <openbmc-bounces+vijaykhemka=fb.com at lists.ozlabs.org on behalf of jason.m.bills at linux.intel.com> wrote:
>      >      >      >
>      >      >      >
>      >      >      >
>      >      >      >      On 10/17/2019 3:32 PM, Vijay Khemka wrote:
>      >      >      >      >
>      >      >      >      > On 10/17/19, 9:03 AM, "openbmc on behalf of Bills, Jason M" <openbmc-bounces+vijaykhemka=fb.com at lists.ozlabs.org on behalf of jason.m.bills at linux.intel.com> wrote:
>      >      >      >      >
>      >      >      >      >      Hi Vijay
>      >      >      >      >
>      >      >      >      >      On 10/16/2019 6:13 PM, Vijay Khemka wrote:
>      >      >      >      >      > One more question on code, I see following code requires powerButtonMask
>      >      >      >      >      > to be set before aquiring GPIO line. Please let me know who sets this
>      >      >      >      >      > powerButtonMask to true. I know this is related to GPIO passthrough but
>      >      >      >      >      > still couldn’t understand where in code it gets set until someone call
>      >      >      >      >      > set-property of dbus.
>      >      >      >      >
>      >      >      >      >      powerButtonMask is a gpiod::line object that returns true if it
>      >      >      >      >      references a GPIO line and false otherwise.
>      >      >      >      >
>      >      >      >      > I understood code but my point here is there will not be any
>      >      >      >      > gpiod::line object if powerButtonMask is defined as false. And
>      >      >      >      > initially it is defined as false means tehre will not be any line
>      >      >      >      > object created until someone sets it to true. And I don't see it
>      >      >      >      > any way to set it true other than set-property through dbus.
>      >      >      >
>      >      >      >      That's correct.  Masking the power button is something that is done by
>      >      >      >      some component outside of power-control.
>      >      >      >
>      >      >      >      For example, we currently use it with the Set Front Panel Button Enables
>      >      >      >      IPMI command to enable/disable the power button.  So, it is only masked
>      >      >      >      when requested.
>      >      >      > So to use x-86-power-control, either we need to have IPMI command to enable
>      >      >      > this or some other daemon has to set this property. Can we have this feature
>      >      >      > optional. I guess this is a prt og GPIO passthrough.
>      >      >
>      >      >      Yes, this is part of GPIO passthrough.  When the GPIO is requested,
>      >      >      passthrough is disabled in the pinctrl driver.  So, to mask the power
>      >      >      button (disable passthrough), power-control requests and holds the
>      >      >      "POWER_OUT" GPIO line.
>      >      >
>      >      >      It should behave normally without this property ever getting set.
>      >      >
>      >      >      >
>      >      >      >      The actual "POWER_OUT" line for power-control is not permanently
>      >      >      >      created, but is asserted using temporary calls like this one:
>      >      >      >      setGPIOOutputForMs("POWER_OUT", 0, powerPulseTimeMs);
>      >      >      >
>      >      >      > This function will not run power on/off sequence until button mask is set. It
>      >      >      > Will only set GPIO value which is not enough for powering on/off.
>      >      >
>      >      >      Something else is going on, here.  The powerButtonMask is a separate
>      >      >      feature from driving the "POWER_OUT" pin.  If powerButtonMask is not
>      >      >      set, then the power on/off should function normally.  There is a special
>      >      >      case in the setGPIOOutputForMs() code to handle when "POWER_OUT" is
>      >      >      driven while powerButtonMask is true:
>      >      >
>      >      >           // If the requested GPIO is masked, use the mask line to set the output
>      >      >           if (powerButtonMask && name == "POWER_OUT")
>      >      >           {
>      >      >               return setMaskedGPIOOutputForMs(powerButtonMask, name, value,
>      >      >                                               durationMs);
>      >      >           }
>      >      >           ...
>      >      >           // No mask set, so request and set the GPIO normally
>      >      >
>      >      >      So, "POWER_OUT" should work either way, but the default behavior is to
>      >      >      function without powerButtonMask set.  Are you seeing failures on your
>      >      >      platform when powerButtonMask is false?
>      >      >
>      >      > No, It is not working because it simplpy sets power_out to '0'. But to power on
>      >      > it should got down as 0 and come back to 1 after a delay. Which happens only
>      >      > in case of powerButtonMask set to true. I guess we may need to fix this.
>      >
>      >      Ahh, okay.  I think I see the issue now.
>      >
>      >      The issue is that because releasing the GPIO on a system with
>      >      pass-through, sets the power button back to the hardware default
>      >      automatically, the software setting doesn't matter, so it is left at 0.
>      >
>      >      If you don't need to keep holding the GPIO line for POWER_OUT, I think
>      >      you can just add the code to revert the POWER_OUT value when the timer
>      >      expires.
>      >
>      >      Take this line:
>      >                   // Set the masked GPIO line back to the opposite value
>      >                   maskedGPIOLine.set_value(!value);
>      >       From here:
>      >      https://github.com/openbmc/x86-power-control/blob/master/power-control-x86/src/power_control.cpp#L891
>      >
>      >      And add it here:
>      >      https://github.com/openbmc/x86-power-control/blob/master/power-control-x86/src/power_control.cpp#L932
>      >
>      > I already did that as a work around, testing different scenario. Will send patch once I see it working.
>      >
>      > I also want to make these timeout values as configurable, either I can add these as a property in dbus interface or
>      > Entity-manager or have a separate config json file. What would you prefer.
>      Another option that may be simpler is to move the values that you want
>      to configure out to a header file and then override the header in a
>      bbappend.  Then you don't need to read or parse any additional
>      configuration information at run time.
>      
> I can do that but bbappend for patch is not accepted in any repository.

Don't patch, simply copy over your new header into the correct directory 
in a do_configure_prepend (I think that's the right yocto step to 
overwrite, but I might be off).

>      >
>      >
>      >      >
>      >      >
>      >
>      >
>      
> 


More information about the openbmc mailing list