From: Nishanth Menon <nm@ti.com>
Cc: "linux-omap@vger.kernel.org" <linux-omap@vger.kernel.org>,
"Varadarajan, Charu Latha" <charu@ti.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [OMAP] GPIO Module disable if all pins inactive
Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2009 19:35:35 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4AE24BD7.2040506@ti.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1256313317-24653-1-git-send-email-charu@ti.com>
Varadarajan, Charu Latha had written, on 10/23/2009 10:55 AM, the following:
> From: Charulatha V <charu@ti.com>
>
> This patch disables a GPIO module when all the pins of GPIO
> module are inactive (clock gating forced at module level) and
> enables the module when any gpio in the module is requested.
>
> Signed-off-by: Charulatha V <charu@ti.com>
> ---
> arch/arm/plat-omap/gpio.c | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++++
> 1 files changed, 22 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm/plat-omap/gpio.c b/arch/arm/plat-omap/gpio.c
> index cdc2a58..2304a5d 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/plat-omap/gpio.c
> +++ b/arch/arm/plat-omap/gpio.c
> @@ -194,6 +194,7 @@ struct gpio_bank {
> spinlock_t lock;
> struct gpio_chip chip;
> struct clk *dbck;
> + u32 gpio_status;
please rename this as gpio_usage?
maybe OMAP1 could also benefit out of this..
> };
>
> #define METHOD_MPUIO 0
> @@ -1080,6 +1081,7 @@ static int omap_gpio_request(struct gpio_chip *chip, unsigned offset)
> {
> struct gpio_bank *bank = container_of(chip, struct gpio_bank, chip);
> unsigned long flags;
> + u32 ctrl = 0;
Remove this to the {} no point in wasting stack space when you dont need
to + you will generate warning for OMAP1 platforms.
>
> spin_lock_irqsave(&bank->lock, flags);
>
> @@ -1097,6 +1099,15 @@ static int omap_gpio_request(struct gpio_chip *chip, unsigned offset)
> __raw_writel(__raw_readl(reg) | (1 << offset), reg);
> }
> #endif
> + if (cpu_is_omap24xx() || cpu_is_omap34xx() || cpu_is_omap44xx()) {
> + if (!bank->gpio_status) {
> + ctrl = __raw_readl(bank->base + OMAP24XX_GPIO_CTRL);
> + /* Module is enabled, clocks are not gated */
> + ctrl &= 0xFFFFFFFE;
> + __raw_writel(ctrl, bank->base + OMAP24XX_GPIO_CTRL);
> + }
> + bank->gpio_status |= 1 << offset;
> + }
why do this every time a gpio is enabled? why not do this iff gpio was
never used before.. how about the following:
if (!bank->gpio_status && (cpu_is_omap24xx() || cpu_is_omap34xx() ||
cpu_is_omap44xx())) {
u32 ctrl = __raw_readl(bank->base + OMAP24XX_GPIO_CTRL);
/* Module is enabled, clocks are not gated */
ctrl &= 0xFFFFFFFE;
__raw_writel(ctrl, bank->base + OMAP24XX_GPIO_CTRL);
}
bank->gpio_status |= 1 << offset;
> spin_unlock_irqrestore(&bank->lock, flags);
>
> return 0;
> @@ -1106,6 +1117,7 @@ static void omap_gpio_free(struct gpio_chip *chip, unsigned offset)
> {
> struct gpio_bank *bank = container_of(chip, struct gpio_bank, chip);
> unsigned long flags;
> + u32 ctrl = 0;
used just once -> move it to the {} + warning to OMAP1
>
> spin_lock_irqsave(&bank->lock, flags);
> #ifdef CONFIG_ARCH_OMAP16XX
> @@ -1123,6 +1135,15 @@ static void omap_gpio_free(struct gpio_chip *chip, unsigned offset)
> __raw_writel(1 << offset, reg);
> }
> #endif
> + if (cpu_is_omap24xx() || cpu_is_omap34xx() || cpu_is_omap44xx()) {
> + bank->gpio_status &= ~(1 << offset);
> + if (!bank->gpio_status) {
> + ctrl = __raw_readl(bank->base + OMAP24XX_GPIO_CTRL);
> + /* Module is disabled, clocks are gated */
> + ctrl |= 1;
> + __raw_writel(ctrl, bank->base + OMAP24XX_GPIO_CTRL);
> + }
> + }
how about this:
bank->gpio_status &= ~(1 << offset);
if (!bank->gpio_status && (cpu_is_omap24xx() || cpu_is_omap34xx() ||
cpu_is_omap44xx())) {
u32 ctrl = __raw_readl(bank->base + OMAP24XX_GPIO_CTRL);
/* Module is disabled, clocks are gated */
ctrl |= 1;
__raw_writel(ctrl, bank->base + OMAP24XX_GPIO_CTRL);
}
> _reset_gpio(bank, bank->chip.base + offset);
> spin_unlock_irqrestore(&bank->lock, flags);
> }
> @@ -1700,6 +1721,7 @@ static int __init _omap_gpio_init(void)
> gpio_count = 32;
> }
> #endif
> + bank->gpio_status = 0;
> /* REVISIT eventually switch from OMAP-specific gpio structs
> * over to the generic ones
> */
Regards,
Nishanth Menon
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-10-24 0:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-10-23 15:55 [PATCH] [OMAP] GPIO Module disable if all pins inactive charu
2009-10-24 0:35 ` Nishanth Menon [this message]
2009-10-24 4:05 ` Varadarajan, Charu Latha
2009-10-24 5:48 ` Nishanth Menon
2009-10-26 9:07 ` Varadarajan, Charu Latha
2009-10-26 10:33 ` Menon, Nishanth
2009-10-26 10:46 ` Varadarajan, Charu Latha
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4AE24BD7.2040506@ti.com \
--to=nm@ti.com \
--cc=charu@ti.com \
--cc=linux-omap@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox