[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190607111244.GE2456@sirena.org.uk>
Date: Fri, 7 Jun 2019 12:12:44 +0100
From: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To: Nicolin Chen <nicoleotsuka@...il.com>
Cc: shengjiu.wang@....com, timur@...nel.org, Xiubo.Lee@...il.com,
festevam@...il.com, lgirdwood@...il.com, perex@...ex.cz,
tiwai@...e.com, alsa-devel@...a-project.org,
linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC/RFT PATCH] Revert "ASoC: fsl_esai: ETDR and TX0~5 registers
are non volatile"
On Thu, Jun 06, 2019 at 04:01:05PM -0700, Nicolin Chen wrote:
> This reverts commit 8973112aa41b8ad956a5b47f2fe17bc2a5cf2645.
Please use subject lines matching the style for the subsystem. This
makes it easier for people to identify relevant patches.
> 1) Though ETDR and TX0~5 are not volatile but write-only registers,
> they should not be cached either. According to the definition of
> "volatile_reg", one should be put in the volatile list if it can
> not be cached.
There's no problem with caching write only registers, having a cache
allows one to do read/modify/write cycles on them and can help with
debugging. The original reason we had cache code in ASoC was for write
only devices.
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (489 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists