[PATCH v6 25/25] gpio/omap: handle set_dataout reg capable IP on restore

[tarun.kanti@ti.com (DebBarma, Tarun Kanti)]

On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 5:37 AM, Kevin Hilman <khilman@ti.com> wrote:
> Tarun Kanti DebBarma <tarun.kanti@ti.com> writes:
>
>> From: Nishanth Menon <nm@ti.com>
>>
>> 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.
>
> OK, minor nit below...
>
>> Signed-off-by: Nishanth Menon <nm@ti.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Tarun Kanti DebBarma <tarun.kanti@ti.com>
>> Reviewed-by: Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@ti.com>
>> ---
>> ?drivers/gpio/gpio-omap.c | ? ?7 ++++++-
>> ?1 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpio-omap.c b/drivers/gpio/gpio-omap.c
>> index a629498..4680b4c 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpio/gpio-omap.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpio-omap.c
>> @@ -1334,7 +1334,12 @@ 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 && bank->regs->clr_dataout)
>
> Why the check for ->clr_dataout here?
Well, I guess it was just an additional check. It can possibly be removed.
--
Tarun
>
>> + ? ? ? ? ? ? __raw_writel(bank->context.dataout,
>> + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? bank->base + bank->regs->set_dataout);
>> + ? ? else
>> + ? ? ? ? ? ? __raw_writel(bank->context.dataout,
>> + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? bank->base + bank->regs->dataout);
>> ? ? ? __raw_writel(bank->context.oe, bank->base + bank->regs->direction);
>>
>> ? ? ? if (bank->dbck_enable_mask) {
>
> Kevin
>