From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: khilman@ti.com (Kevin Hilman) Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2011 11:54:15 -0800 Subject: [PATCH v8 24/24] gpio/omap: handle set_dataout reg capable IP on restore In-Reply-To: (Tarun Kanti DebBarma's message of "Wed, 23 Nov 2011 18:01:35 +0530") References: <1317803593-12259-1-git-send-email-tarun.kanti@ti.com> <1317803593-12259-25-git-send-email-tarun.kanti@ti.com> <87aa8bde2d.fsf@ti.com> Message-ID: <87zkfmaa3c.fsf@ti.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org "DebBarma, Tarun Kanti" writes: > On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 5:35 PM, DebBarma, Tarun Kanti > wrote: >> On Fri, Nov 4, 2011 at 10:23 PM, Kevin Hilman wrote: >>> Tarun Kanti DebBarma writes: >>> >>>> From: Nishanth Menon >>>> >>>> GPIO IP revisions such as those used in OMAP4 have a set_dataout >>>> while the previous revisions used a single dataout register. >>>> Depending on what is available restore the dataout settings >>>> to the right register. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Nishanth Menon >>>> Signed-off-by: Tarun Kanti DebBarma >>>> Reviewed-by: Santosh Shilimkar >>>> --- >>>> ?drivers/gpio/gpio-omap.c | ? ?9 +++++++-- >>>> ?1 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpio-omap.c b/drivers/gpio/gpio-omap.c >>>> index 4009446..3df7a98 100644 >>>> --- a/drivers/gpio/gpio-omap.c >>>> +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpio-omap.c >>>> @@ -1073,7 +1073,7 @@ static int __devinit omap_gpio_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) >>>> ? ? ? bank->get_context_loss_count = pdata->get_context_loss_count; >>>> ? ? ? bank->regs = pdata->regs; >>>> >>>> - ? ? if (bank->regs->set_dataout && bank->regs->clr_dataout) >>>> + ? ? if (bank->regs->set_dataout) >>> >>> This change isn't right. >>> >>> The _set_gpio_dataout_reg function depends on the existence of >>> ->clr_dataout too. >> Ok, I will add the clr_dataout condtion as well. > >> >>> >>>> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? bank->set_dataout = _set_gpio_dataout_reg; >>>> ? ? ? else >>>> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? bank->set_dataout = _set_gpio_dataout_mask; >>>> @@ -1351,7 +1351,12 @@ static void omap_gpio_restore_context(struct gpio_bank *bank) >>>> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? bank->base + bank->regs->risingdetect); >>>> ? ? ? __raw_writel(bank->context.fallingdetect, >>>> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? bank->base + bank->regs->fallingdetect); >>>> - ? ? __raw_writel(bank->context.dataout, bank->base + bank->regs->dataout); >>>> + ? ? if (bank->regs->set_dataout) >>> >>> Why the check again? ?The check has already been done in probe. >>> >>> Just use bank->set_dataout() here. >> Sure, i will make the change. > > When I look at the signature of set_dataout(), it does not seem > straight forward to be used here. It expects (struct gpio_bank *bank, > int gpio, int enable) to be passed to it. IOW, it expects to only set 1 bit, where the context restore needs to set the value for the whole register. OK, then keep the original version, but make sure the if statement matches is checking for ->set_dataout and ->clr_dataout like the other one. Kevin