From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jingoo Han Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] drm/exynos: dp: Remove support for unused dptx-phy Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2014 13:08:53 +0900 Message-ID: <000001cffe2e$5f83fd30$1e8bf790$%han@samsung.com> References: <1414675442-3471-1-git-send-email-gautam.vivek@samsung.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-reply-to: <1414675442-3471-1-git-send-email-gautam.vivek@samsung.com> Content-language: ko Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: 'Vivek Gautam' Cc: dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, seanpaul@google.com, ajaykumar.rs@samsung.com, 'Inki Dae' , 'Jingoo Han' List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On Thursday, October 30, 2014 10:24 PM, Vivek Gautam wrote: > > Now that we have moved to generic phy based bindings, > we don't need to have any code related to older dptx-phy. > Nobody is using this dptx-phy anymore, so removing the > same. Right, older dptx-phy was replaced long time ago. However, it was not removed for DT compatibility. I think that now these old DT properties can be removed. I added some comments below. > > Signed-off-by: Vivek Gautam > Cc: Inki Dae > Cc: Jingoo Han > --- > > Changes from V1: > - Reworked error handling in exynos_dp_dt_parse_phydata() as commented > by Inki. > > drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_dp_core.c | 67 ++++++++----------------------- > drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_dp_core.h | 2 - > 2 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 52 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_dp_core.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_dp_core.c > index cd50ece..206163b 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_dp_core.c > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_dp_core.c > @@ -1052,28 +1052,14 @@ static int exynos_dp_create_connector(struct exynos_drm_display *display, > > static void exynos_dp_phy_init(struct exynos_dp_device *dp) > { > - if (dp->phy) { > + if (dp->phy) > phy_power_on(dp->phy); > - } else if (dp->phy_addr) { > - u32 reg; > - > - reg = __raw_readl(dp->phy_addr); > - reg |= dp->enable_mask; > - __raw_writel(reg, dp->phy_addr); > - } > } > > static void exynos_dp_phy_exit(struct exynos_dp_device *dp) > { > - if (dp->phy) { > + if (dp->phy) > phy_power_off(dp->phy); > - } else if (dp->phy_addr) { > - u32 reg; > - > - reg = __raw_readl(dp->phy_addr); > - reg &= ~(dp->enable_mask); > - __raw_writel(reg, dp->phy_addr); > - } > } > > static void exynos_dp_poweron(struct exynos_drm_display *display) > @@ -1212,40 +1198,13 @@ static struct video_info *exynos_dp_dt_parse_pdata(struct device *dev) > > static int exynos_dp_dt_parse_phydata(struct exynos_dp_device *dp) > { > - struct device_node *dp_phy_node = of_node_get(dp->dev->of_node); > - u32 phy_base; > - int ret = 0; > - > - dp_phy_node = of_find_node_by_name(dp_phy_node, "dptx-phy"); > - if (!dp_phy_node) { > - dp->phy = devm_phy_get(dp->dev, "dp"); > - return PTR_ERR_OR_ZERO(dp->phy); > - } > - > - if (of_property_read_u32(dp_phy_node, "reg", &phy_base)) { > - dev_err(dp->dev, "failed to get reg for dptx-phy\n"); > - ret = -EINVAL; > - goto err; > - } > - > - if (of_property_read_u32(dp_phy_node, "samsung,enable-mask", > - &dp->enable_mask)) { > - dev_err(dp->dev, "failed to get enable-mask for dptx-phy\n"); > - ret = -EINVAL; > - goto err; > - } > - > - dp->phy_addr = ioremap(phy_base, SZ_4); > - if (!dp->phy_addr) { > - dev_err(dp->dev, "failed to ioremap dp-phy\n"); > - ret = -ENOMEM; > - goto err; > + dp->phy = devm_phy_get(dp->dev, "dp"); > + if (IS_ERR(dp->phy)) { > + dev_err(dp->dev, "no DP phy configured\n"); > + return PTR_ERR(dp->phy); > } > > -err: > - of_node_put(dp_phy_node); > - > - return ret; > + return 0; > } > > static int exynos_dp_dt_parse_panel(struct exynos_dp_device *dp) > @@ -1278,8 +1237,16 @@ static int exynos_dp_bind(struct device *dev, struct device *master, void *data) > return PTR_ERR(dp->video_info); > > ret = exynos_dp_dt_parse_phydata(dp); In your patch, exynos_dp_dt_parse_phydata() calls only devm_phy_get(). Then, how about calling devm_phy_get() directly and removing exynos_dp_dt_parse_phydata()? It looks simpler. Best regards, Jingoo Han > - if (ret) > - return ret; > + if (ret) { > + /* > + * phy itself is not enabled, so we can move forward > + * assigning NULL to phy pointer. > + */ > + if (ret == -ENOSYS || ret == -ENODEV) > + dp->phy = NULL; > + else > + return ret; > + } > > if (!dp->panel) { > ret = exynos_dp_dt_parse_panel(dp); > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_dp_core.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_dp_core.h > index a1aee69..6426201 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_dp_core.h > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_dp_core.h > @@ -153,8 +153,6 @@ struct exynos_dp_device { > struct clk *clock; > unsigned int irq; > void __iomem *reg_base; > - void __iomem *phy_addr; > - unsigned int enable_mask; > > struct video_info *video_info; > struct link_train link_train; > -- > 1.7.10.4