[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190703091046.GA8764@Asurada>
Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2019 02:10:46 -0700
From: Nicolin Chen <nicoleotsuka@...il.com>
To: shengjiu.wang@....com
Cc: timur@...nel.org, Xiubo.Lee@...il.com, festevam@...il.com,
broonie@...nel.org, alsa-devel@...a-project.org,
linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 1/2] ASoC: fsl_esai: Wrap some operations to be
functions
Looks good to me, yet two small comments inline.
Please add this to this patch in the next version:
Acked-by: Nicolin Chen <nicoleotsuka@...il.com>
On Wed, Jul 03, 2019 at 02:42:04PM +0800, shengjiu.wang@....com wrote:
> +static int fsl_esai_register_restore(struct fsl_esai *esai_priv)
> +{
> + int ret;
> + /* FIFO reset for safety */
> + regmap_update_bits(esai_priv->regmap, REG_ESAI_TFCR,
Checkpatch script would probably warn this. Usually we add a blank
line after variable declarations.
> @@ -866,22 +935,9 @@ static int fsl_esai_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>
> dev_set_drvdata(&pdev->dev, esai_priv);
>
> - /* Reset ESAI unit */
> - ret = regmap_write(esai_priv->regmap, REG_ESAI_ECR, ESAI_ECR_ERST);
> - if (ret) {
> - dev_err(&pdev->dev, "failed to reset ESAI: %d\n", ret);
> + ret = fsl_esai_init(esai_priv);
Could we rename this function to fsl_easi_hw_init() or something
clear like fsl_esai_register_init? fsl_easi_init() feels like a
driver init() function to me.
Thank you
Nicolin
Powered by blists - more mailing lists