From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from mailout1.w1.samsung.com ([210.118.77.11]:43190 "EHLO mailout1.w1.samsung.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754779Ab3F1KLe (ORCPT ); Fri, 28 Jun 2013 06:11:34 -0400 Message-id: <51CD6153.5050406@samsung.com> Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2013 12:11:31 +0200 From: Sylwester Nawrocki MIME-version: 1.0 To: Hui Wang Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org, kishon@ti.com, linux-media@vger.kernel.org, kyungmin.park@samsung.com, balbi@ti.com, t.figa@samsung.com, devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org, kgene.kim@samsung.com, dh09.lee@samsung.com, jg1.han@samsung.com, inki.dae@samsung.com, plagnioj@jcrosoft.com, linux-fbdev@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/5] phy: Add driver for Exynos MIPI CSIS/DSIM DPHYs References: <1372258946-15607-1-git-send-email-s.nawrocki@samsung.com> <1372258946-15607-2-git-send-email-s.nawrocki@samsung.com> <51CD4698.3070409@gmail.com> In-reply-to: <51CD4698.3070409@gmail.com> Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-media-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 06/28/2013 10:17 AM, Hui Wang wrote: > On 06/26/2013 11:02 PM, Sylwester Nawrocki wrote: >> Add a PHY provider driver for the Samsung S5P/Exynos SoC MIPI CSI-2 >> receiver and MIPI DSI transmitter DPHYs. >> >> Signed-off-by: Sylwester Nawrocki >> Signed-off-by: Kyungmin Park >> --- >> Changes since v2: >> - adapted to the generic PHY API v9: use phy_set/get_drvdata(), >> - fixed of_xlate callback to return ERR_PTR() instead of NULL, >> - namespace cleanup, put "GPL v2" as MODULE_LICENSE, removed pr_debug, >> - removed phy id check in __set_phy_state(). >> --- > [...] >> + >> + if (IS_EXYNOS_MIPI_DSIM_PHY_ID(id)) >> + reset = EXYNOS_MIPI_PHY_MRESETN; >> + else >> + reset = EXYNOS_MIPI_PHY_SRESETN; >> + >> + spin_lock_irqsave(&state->slock, flags); > > Sorry for one stupid question here, why do you use spin_lock_irqsave() > rather than spin_lock(), > I don't see the irq handler will use this spinlock anywhere in this c file. Yes, there is no chance the PHY users could call the phy ops from within an interrupt context. Especially now when there is a per phy object mutex used in the PHY operation helpers. So I'll replace it with plain spin_lock/unlock. Thank you for the review. Regards, Sylwester