[PATCH 1/3] sound/spitz: Properly handle MIC GPIO

[PATCH 1/3] sound/spitz: Properly handle MIC GPIO

[Marek Vasut]

This patch firstly restructurizes the code a bit by getting rid of continuous
checking for machine type in spitz_mic_bias().

Then the patch properly requests the MIC GPIO in the spitz_init() and frees it
in spitz_exit().

Signed-off-by: Marek Vasut <marek.vasut@gmail.com>
---
 sound/soc/pxa/spitz.c |   41 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------
 1 files changed, 29 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)

diff --git a/sound/soc/pxa/spitz.c b/sound/soc/pxa/spitz.c
index 8e15713..b253d86 100644
--- a/sound/soc/pxa/spitz.c
+++ b/sound/soc/pxa/spitz.c
@@ -42,6 +42,7 @@
 
 static int spitz_jack_func;
 static int spitz_spk_func;
+static int spitz_mic_gpio;
 
 static void spitz_ext_control(struct snd_soc_codec *codec)
 {
@@ -217,14 +218,7 @@ static int spitz_set_spk(struct snd_kcontrol *kcontrol,
 static int spitz_mic_bias(struct snd_soc_dapm_widget *w,
 	struct snd_kcontrol *k, int event)
 {
-	if (machine_is_borzoi() || machine_is_spitz())
-		gpio_set_value(SPITZ_GPIO_MIC_BIAS,
-				SND_SOC_DAPM_EVENT_ON(event));
-
-	if (machine_is_akita())
-		gpio_set_value(AKITA_GPIO_MIC_BIAS,
-				SND_SOC_DAPM_EVENT_ON(event));
-
+	gpio_set_value_cansleep(spitz_mic_gpio, SND_SOC_DAPM_EVENT_ON(event));
 	return 0;
 }
 
@@ -339,22 +333,45 @@ static int __init spitz_init(void)
 	if (!(machine_is_spitz() || machine_is_borzoi() || machine_is_akita()))
 		return -ENODEV;
 
+	if (machine_is_borzoi() || machine_is_spitz())
+		spitz_mic_gpio = SPITZ_GPIO_MIC_BIAS;
+	else
+		spitz_mic_gpio = AKITA_GPIO_MIC_BIAS;
+
+	ret = gpio_request(spitz_mic_gpio, "MIC GPIO");
+	if (ret)
+		goto err1;
+
+	ret = gpio_direction_output(spitz_mic_gpio, 0);
+	if (ret)
+		goto err2;
+
 	spitz_snd_device = platform_device_alloc("soc-audio", -1);
-	if (!spitz_snd_device)
-		return -ENOMEM;
+	if (!spitz_snd_device) {
+		ret = -ENOMEM;
+		goto err2;
+	}
 
 	platform_set_drvdata(spitz_snd_device, &snd_soc_spitz);
-	ret = platform_device_add(spitz_snd_device);
 
+	ret = platform_device_add(spitz_snd_device);
 	if (ret)
-		platform_device_put(spitz_snd_device);
+		goto err3;
+
+	return 0;
 
+err3:
+	platform_device_put(spitz_snd_device);
+err2:
+	gpio_free(spitz_mic_gpio);
+err1:
 	return ret;
 }
 
 static void __exit spitz_exit(void)
 {
 	platform_device_unregister(spitz_snd_device);
+	gpio_free(spitz_mic_gpio);
 }
 
 module_init(spitz_init);
-- 
1.7.4.1

[PATCH 2/3] Use gpio_set_value_cansleep() in corgi_lcd.c

[Marek Vasut]

Signed-off-by: Marek Vasut <marek.vasut@gmail.com>
---
 drivers/video/backlight/corgi_lcd.c |    4 ++--
 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/video/backlight/corgi_lcd.c b/drivers/video/backlight/corgi_lcd.c
index 1e71c35..8c80cb7 100644
--- a/drivers/video/backlight/corgi_lcd.c
+++ b/drivers/video/backlight/corgi_lcd.c
@@ -409,10 +409,10 @@ static int corgi_bl_set_intensity(struct corgi_lcd *lcd, int intensity)
 	cont = !!(intensity & 0x20) ^ lcd->gpio_backlight_cont_inverted;
 
 	if (gpio_is_valid(lcd->gpio_backlight_cont))
-		gpio_set_value(lcd->gpio_backlight_cont, cont);
+		gpio_set_value_cansleep(lcd->gpio_backlight_cont, cont);
 
 	if (gpio_is_valid(lcd->gpio_backlight_on))
-		gpio_set_value(lcd->gpio_backlight_on, intensity);
+		gpio_set_value_cansleep(lcd->gpio_backlight_on, intensity);
 
 	if (lcd->kick_battery)
 		lcd->kick_battery();
-- 
1.7.4.1

[PATCH 2/3] Use gpio_set_value_cansleep() in corgi_lcd.c

[Eric Miao]

Personally, I don't quite like the idea of an explicit _cansleep() version,
which is just confusing. A programmer shouldn't be aware of which
version to use.

David, you have any justification?


On Sat, Apr 2, 2011 at 9:43 AM, Marek Vasut <marek.vasut@gmail.com> wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Marek Vasut <marek.vasut@gmail.com>
> ---
> ?drivers/video/backlight/corgi_lcd.c | ? ?4 ++--
> ?1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/video/backlight/corgi_lcd.c b/drivers/video/backlight/corgi_lcd.c
> index 1e71c35..8c80cb7 100644
> --- a/drivers/video/backlight/corgi_lcd.c
> +++ b/drivers/video/backlight/corgi_lcd.c
> @@ -409,10 +409,10 @@ static int corgi_bl_set_intensity(struct corgi_lcd *lcd, int intensity)
> ? ? ? ?cont = !!(intensity & 0x20) ^ lcd->gpio_backlight_cont_inverted;
>
> ? ? ? ?if (gpio_is_valid(lcd->gpio_backlight_cont))
> - ? ? ? ? ? ? ? gpio_set_value(lcd->gpio_backlight_cont, cont);
> + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? gpio_set_value_cansleep(lcd->gpio_backlight_cont, cont);
>
> ? ? ? ?if (gpio_is_valid(lcd->gpio_backlight_on))
> - ? ? ? ? ? ? ? gpio_set_value(lcd->gpio_backlight_on, intensity);
> + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? gpio_set_value_cansleep(lcd->gpio_backlight_on, intensity);
>
> ? ? ? ?if (lcd->kick_battery)
> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?lcd->kick_battery();
> --
> 1.7.4.1
>
>

[PATCH 2/3] Use gpio_set_value_cansleep() in corgi_lcd.c

[Mark Brown]

On Mon, Apr 04, 2011 at 06:45:46PM +0800, Eric Miao wrote:
> Personally, I don't quite like the idea of an explicit _cansleep() version,
> which is just confusing. A programmer shouldn't be aware of which
> version to use.

When working in interrupt context you need to pay attention to this
stuff; personally I'd prefer an explict IRQ safe version but YMMV.  The
only use the code makes of this is to generate warnings to make problems
easier to diagnose.

> David, you have any justification?

Sadly David passed away recently.

[PATCH 2/3] Use gpio_set_value_cansleep() in corgi_lcd.c

[Eric Miao]

On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 8:06 PM, Mark Brown
<broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 04, 2011 at 06:45:46PM +0800, Eric Miao wrote:
>> Personally, I don't quite like the idea of an explicit _cansleep() version,
>> which is just confusing. A programmer shouldn't be aware of which
>> version to use.
>
> When working in interrupt context you need to pay attention to this
> stuff; personally I'd prefer an explict IRQ safe version but YMMV. ?The
> only use the code makes of this is to generate warnings to make problems
> easier to diagnose.
>
>> David, you have any justification?
>
> Sadly David passed away recently.
>

What????!!!!????? I didn't know that.

[PATCH 2/3] Use gpio_set_value_cansleep() in corgi_lcd.c

[Marek Vasut]

> On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 8:06 PM, Mark Brown
> <broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 04, 2011 at 06:45:46PM +0800, Eric Miao wrote:
> > > Personally, I don't quite like the idea of an explicit _cansleep()
> > > version, which is just confusing. A programmer shouldn't be aware of
> > > which version to use.
> > 
> > When working in interrupt context you need to pay attention to this
> > stuff; personally I'd prefer an explict IRQ safe version but YMMV. ?The
> > only use the code makes of this is to generate warnings to make
> > problems easier to diagnose.
> > 
> > > David, you have any justification?
> > 
> > Sadly David passed away recently.
> > 
> 
> What????!!!!????? I didn't know that.

Me neither. I'm shocked. What happened?

[PATCH 2/3] Use gpio_set_value_cansleep() in corgi_lcd.c

[Russell King - ARM Linux]

On Mon, Apr 04, 2011 at 02:44:17PM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 8:06 PM, Mark Brown
> > <broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> wrote:
> > > On Mon, Apr 04, 2011 at 06:45:46PM +0800, Eric Miao wrote:
> > > > Personally, I don't quite like the idea of an explicit _cansleep()
> > > > version, which is just confusing. A programmer shouldn't be aware of
> > > > which version to use.
> > > 
> > > When working in interrupt context you need to pay attention to this
> > > stuff; personally I'd prefer an explict IRQ safe version but YMMV. ?The
> > > only use the code makes of this is to generate warnings to make
> > > problems easier to diagnose.
> > > 
> > > > David, you have any justification?
> > > 
> > > Sadly David passed away recently.
> > > 
> > 
> > What????!!!!????? I didn't know that.
> 
> Me neither. I'm shocked. What happened?

[PATCH 2/3] Use gpio_set_value_cansleep() in corgi_lcd.c

[Marek Vasut]

> On Mon, Apr 04, 2011 at 02:44:17PM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > > On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 8:06 PM, Mark Brown
> > > <broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Apr 04, 2011 at 06:45:46PM +0800, Eric Miao wrote:
> > > > > Personally, I don't quite like the idea of an explicit
> > > > > _cansleep() version, which is just confusing. A programmer
> > > > > shouldn't be aware of which version to use.
> > > > 
> > > > When working in interrupt context you need to pay attention to this
> > > > stuff; personally I'd prefer an explict IRQ safe version but YMMV.
> > > > ?The only use the code makes of this is to generate warnings to
> > > > make problems easier to diagnose.
> > > > 
> > > > > David, you have any justification?
> > > > 
> > > > Sadly David passed away recently.
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > What????!!!!????? I didn't know that.
> > 
> > Me neither. I'm shocked. What happened?
> 
> From what I can tell, so far it's been passed around in private mail
> only, and so people are hearing about it 3rd, 4th or more hand - which
> really isn't the way to go about giving this news.
> 
> So, I'm not going to pass on the details which I've heard, instead
> I'd suggest people wait for (or try to find) an official announcement.
> 

My condolences :-(

[PATCH 2/3] Use gpio_set_value_cansleep() in corgi_lcd.c

[Russell King - ARM Linux]

On Mon, Apr 04, 2011 at 01:49:26PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 04, 2011 at 02:44:17PM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > > On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 8:06 PM, Mark Brown
> > > <broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Apr 04, 2011 at 06:45:46PM +0800, Eric Miao wrote:
> > > > > Personally, I don't quite like the idea of an explicit _cansleep()
> > > > > version, which is just confusing. A programmer shouldn't be aware of
> > > > > which version to use.
> > > > 
> > > > When working in interrupt context you need to pay attention to this
> > > > stuff; personally I'd prefer an explict IRQ safe version but YMMV. ?The
> > > > only use the code makes of this is to generate warnings to make
> > > > problems easier to diagnose.
> > > > 
> > > > > David, you have any justification?
> > > > 
> > > > Sadly David passed away recently.
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > What????!!!!????? I didn't know that.
> > 
> > Me neither. I'm shocked. What happened?
> 
> >From what I can tell, so far it's been passed around in private mail
> only, and so people are hearing about it 3rd, 4th or more hand - which
> really isn't the way to go about giving this news.
> 
> So, I'm not going to pass on the details which I've heard, instead
> I'd suggest people wait for (or try to find) an official announcement.

Additionally, I'd like to say that I've requested from the person I heard
the news from the details for sending condolences, but so far I'm none
the wiser.

[PATCH 2/3] Use gpio_set_value_cansleep() in corgi_lcd.c

[Pavel Machek]

On Mon 2011-04-04 18:45:46, Eric Miao wrote:
> Personally, I don't quite like the idea of an explicit _cansleep() version,
> which is just confusing. A programmer shouldn't be aware of which
> version to use.
> 
> David, you have any justification?

Whether it is possible to sleep in given context  is not  something
that  can be detected automatically in general case; so two different
functions are needed.
								Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html

[PATCH 3/3] PXA: Reorganise pxa2xx_base init() function

[Marek Vasut]

This kills dead code and kills some redundant code.

Original idea by: Cyril Hrubis <metan@ucw.cz>

Signed-off-by: Marek Vasut <marek.vasut@gmail.com>
---
 drivers/pcmcia/pxa2xx_base.c |   30 +++++++++++++-----------------
 1 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/pcmcia/pxa2xx_base.c b/drivers/pcmcia/pxa2xx_base.c
index 2c54054..687d203 100644
--- a/drivers/pcmcia/pxa2xx_base.c
+++ b/drivers/pcmcia/pxa2xx_base.c
@@ -296,18 +296,20 @@ static int pxa2xx_drv_pcmcia_probe(struct platform_device *dev)
 		goto err0;
 	}
 
-	clk = clk_get(&dev->dev, NULL);
-	if (!clk)
-		return -ENODEV;
-
-	pxa2xx_drv_pcmcia_ops(ops);
-
 	sinfo = kzalloc(SKT_DEV_INFO_SIZE(ops->nr), GFP_KERNEL);
 	if (!sinfo) {
-		clk_put(clk);
-		return -ENOMEM;
+		ret = -ENOMEM;
+		goto err0;
 	}
 
+	clk = clk_get(&dev->dev, NULL);
+	if (!clk) {
+		ret = -ENODEV;
+		goto err0;
+	}
+
+	pxa2xx_drv_pcmcia_ops(ops);
+
 	sinfo->nskt = ops->nr;
 	sinfo->clk = clk;
 
@@ -327,15 +329,8 @@ static int pxa2xx_drv_pcmcia_probe(struct platform_device *dev)
 			goto err1;
 	}
 
-	if (ret) {
-		while (--i >= 0)
-			soc_pcmcia_remove_one(&sinfo->skt[i]);
-		kfree(sinfo);
-		clk_put(clk);
-	} else {
-		pxa2xx_configure_sockets(&dev->dev);
-		dev_set_drvdata(&dev->dev, sinfo);
-	}
+	pxa2xx_configure_sockets(&dev->dev);
+	dev_set_drvdata(&dev->dev, sinfo);
 
 	return 0;
 
@@ -343,6 +338,7 @@ err1:
 	while (--i >= 0)
 		soc_pcmcia_remove_one(&sinfo->skt[i]);
 	kfree(sinfo);
+	clk_put(clk);
 err0:
 	return ret;
 }
-- 
1.7.4.1

[PATCH 1/3] sound/spitz: Properly handle MIC GPIO

[Mark Brown]

On Sat, Apr 02, 2011 at 03:43:15AM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
> This patch firstly restructurizes the code a bit by getting rid of continuous
> checking for machine type in spitz_mic_bias().
> 
> Then the patch properly requests the MIC GPIO in the spitz_init() and frees it
> in spitz_exit().
> 
> Signed-off-by: Marek Vasut <marek.vasut@gmail.com>

Applied, thanks.