Message-ID: <CAMRc=Mcqe7VgkckL3e9GmM7fNYe=a7OO1hEv-Nyh1yiMNwfzfw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 23 Jul 2018 10:03:20 +0200
From:   Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>
To:     Sekhar Nori <nsekhar@...com>, Kevin Hilman <khilman@...nel.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
        David Lechner <david@...hnology.com>,
        Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>,
        Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>,
        Ohad Ben-Cohen <ohad@...ery.com>,
        Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>
Cc:     Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        devicetree <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-clk <linux-clk@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-remoteproc@...r.kernel.org,
        Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@...libre.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 1/4] remoteproc/davinci: use the reset framework

2018-06-21 9:37 GMT+02:00 Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>:
> From: Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@...libre.com>
>
> Switch to using the reset framework instead of handcoded reset routines
> we used so far.
>
> Signed-off-by: Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@...libre.com>
> Reviewed-by: Sekhar Nori <nsekhar@...com>
> Reviewed-by: Philipp Zabel <p.zabel@...gutronix.de>
> ---
>  drivers/remoteproc/da8xx_remoteproc.c | 34 +++++++++++++++++++++++----
>  1 file changed, 29 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/da8xx_remoteproc.c b/drivers/remoteproc/da8xx_remoteproc.c
> index b668e32996e2..76c06b70a1c6 100644
> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/da8xx_remoteproc.c
> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/da8xx_remoteproc.c
> @@ -10,6 +10,7 @@
>
>  #include <linux/bitops.h>
>  #include <linux/clk.h>
> +#include <linux/reset.h>
>  #include <linux/err.h>
>  #include <linux/interrupt.h>
>  #include <linux/io.h>
> @@ -20,8 +21,6 @@
>  #include <linux/platform_device.h>
>  #include <linux/remoteproc.h>
>
> -#include <mach/clock.h>   /* for davinci_clk_reset_assert/deassert() */
> -
>  #include "remoteproc_internal.h"
>
>  static char *da8xx_fw_name;
> @@ -72,6 +71,7 @@ struct da8xx_rproc {
>         struct da8xx_rproc_mem *mem;
>         int num_mems;
>         struct clk *dsp_clk;
> +       struct reset_control *dsp_reset;
>         void (*ack_fxn)(struct irq_data *data);
>         struct irq_data *irq_data;
>         void __iomem *chipsig;
> @@ -138,6 +138,7 @@ static int da8xx_rproc_start(struct rproc *rproc)
>         struct device *dev = rproc->dev.parent;
>         struct da8xx_rproc *drproc = (struct da8xx_rproc *)rproc->priv;
>         struct clk *dsp_clk = drproc->dsp_clk;
> +       struct reset_control *dsp_reset = drproc->dsp_reset;
>         int ret;
>
>         /* hw requires the start (boot) address be on 1KB boundary */
> @@ -155,7 +156,12 @@ static int da8xx_rproc_start(struct rproc *rproc)
>                 return ret;
>         }
>
> -       davinci_clk_reset_deassert(dsp_clk);
> +       ret = reset_control_deassert(dsp_reset);
> +       if (ret) {
> +               dev_err(dev, "reset_control_deassert() failed: %d\n", ret);
> +               clk_disable_unprepare(dsp_clk);
> +               return ret;
> +       }
>
>         return 0;
>  }
> @@ -163,8 +169,15 @@ static int da8xx_rproc_start(struct rproc *rproc)
>  static int da8xx_rproc_stop(struct rproc *rproc)
>  {
>         struct da8xx_rproc *drproc = rproc->priv;
> +       struct device *dev = rproc->dev.parent;
> +       int ret;
> +
> +       ret = reset_control_assert(drproc->dsp_reset);
> +       if (ret) {
> +               dev_err(dev, "reset_control_assert() failed: %d\n", ret);
> +               return ret;
> +       }
>
> -       davinci_clk_reset_assert(drproc->dsp_clk);
>         clk_disable_unprepare(drproc->dsp_clk);
>
>         return 0;
> @@ -232,6 +245,7 @@ static int da8xx_rproc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>         struct resource *bootreg_res;
>         struct resource *chipsig_res;
>         struct clk *dsp_clk;
> +       struct reset_control *dsp_reset;
>         void __iomem *chipsig;
>         void __iomem *bootreg;
>         int irq;
> @@ -268,6 +282,15 @@ static int da8xx_rproc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>                 return PTR_ERR(dsp_clk);
>         }
>
> +       dsp_reset = devm_reset_control_get_exclusive(dev, NULL);
> +       if (IS_ERR(dsp_reset)) {
> +               if (PTR_ERR(dsp_reset) != -EPROBE_DEFER)
> +                       dev_err(dev, "unable to get reset control: %ld\n",
> +                               PTR_ERR(dsp_reset));
> +
> +               return PTR_ERR(dsp_reset);
> +       }
> +
>         if (dev->of_node) {
>                 ret = of_reserved_mem_device_init(dev);
>                 if (ret) {
> @@ -287,6 +310,7 @@ static int da8xx_rproc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>         drproc = rproc->priv;
>         drproc->rproc = rproc;
>         drproc->dsp_clk = dsp_clk;
> +       drproc->dsp_reset = dsp_reset;
>         rproc->has_iommu = false;
>
>         ret = da8xx_rproc_get_internal_memories(pdev, drproc);
> @@ -309,7 +333,7 @@ static int da8xx_rproc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>          * *not* in reset, but da8xx_rproc_start() needs the DSP to be
>          * held in reset at the time it is called.
>          */
> -       ret = davinci_clk_reset_assert(drproc->dsp_clk);
> +       ret = reset_control_assert(dsp_reset);
>         if (ret)
>                 goto free_rproc;
>
> --
> 2.17.1
>

Hi Bjorn, Sekhar,

I'm not seeing this patch in next, did you agree on how to pick it up for 4.19?

Thanks in advance,
Bartosz

Powered by blists - more mailing lists