[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <52973061.2070100@ti.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Nov 2013 14:00:33 +0200
From: Peter Ujfalusi <peter.ujfalusi@...com>
To: Tomi Valkeinen <tomi.valkeinen@...com>,
Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] pinctrl: single: fix pcs_disable with bits_per_mux
On 11/28/2013 01:29 PM, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
> pcs_enable() uses vals->mask instead of pcs->fmask when bits_per_mux is
> enabled. However, pcs_disable() always uses pcs->fmask.
>
> Fix pcs_disable() to use vals->mask with bits_per_mux.
I wonder how did I missed this?
Acked-by: Peter Ujfalusi <peter.ujfalusi@...com>
>
> Signed-off-by: Tomi Valkeinen <tomi.valkeinen@...com>
> ---
> drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-single.c | 10 ++++++++--
> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-single.c b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-single.c
> index 829b98c5c66f..174f4c50cd77 100644
> --- a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-single.c
> +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-single.c
> @@ -525,12 +525,18 @@ static void pcs_disable(struct pinctrl_dev *pctldev, unsigned fselector,
> for (i = 0; i < func->nvals; i++) {
> struct pcs_func_vals *vals;
> unsigned long flags;
> - unsigned val;
> + unsigned val, mask;
>
> vals = &func->vals[i];
> raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&pcs->lock, flags);
> val = pcs->read(vals->reg);
> - val &= ~pcs->fmask;
> +
> + if (pcs->bits_per_mux)
> + mask = vals->mask;
> + else
> + mask = pcs->fmask;
> +
> + val &= ~mask;
> val |= pcs->foff << pcs->fshift;
> pcs->write(val, vals->reg);
> raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&pcs->lock, flags);
>
--
Péter
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists