[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20210326203105.GA906530@bjorn-Precision-5520>
Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2021 15:31:05 -0500
From: Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@...nel.org>
To: Jim Quinlan <jim2101024@...il.com>, '@...rn-Precision-5520
Cc: linux-pci@...r.kernel.org,
Nicolas Saenz Julienne <nsaenzjulienne@...e.de>,
Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>, Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com, james.quinlan@...adcom.com,
Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@....com>,
Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
Jim Quinlan <jquinlan@...adcom.com>,
"moderated list:BROADCOM BCM2711/BCM2835 ARM ARCHITECTURE"
<linux-rpi-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
"moderated list:BROADCOM BCM2711/BCM2835 ARM ARCHITECTURE"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 6/6] PCI: brcmstb: Check return value of
clk_prepare_enable()
On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 03:19:04PM -0400, Jim Quinlan wrote:
> The check was missing on PCIe resume.
"PCIe resume" isn't really a thing, per se. PCI/PCIe gives us device
power states (D0, D3hot, etc), and Linux power management builds
suspend/resume on top of those. Maybe:
Check for failure of clk_prepare_enable() on device resume.
> Signed-off-by: Jim Quinlan <jim2101024@...il.com>
> Acked-by: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
> Fixes: 8195b7417018 ("PCI: brcmstb: Add suspend and resume pm_ops")
> ---
> drivers/pci/controller/pcie-brcmstb.c | 8 ++++++--
> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/pci/controller/pcie-brcmstb.c b/drivers/pci/controller/pcie-brcmstb.c
> index 2d9288399014..f6d9d785b301 100644
> --- a/drivers/pci/controller/pcie-brcmstb.c
> +++ b/drivers/pci/controller/pcie-brcmstb.c
> @@ -1396,7 +1396,9 @@ static int brcm_pcie_resume(struct device *dev)
> int ret;
>
> base = pcie->base;
> - clk_prepare_enable(pcie->clk);
> + ret = clk_prepare_enable(pcie->clk);
> + if (ret)
> + return ret;
This fix doesn't look like it depends on the EP regulator support.
Maybe it should be a preparatory patch before patch 1/6? It could
then easily be backported to kernels that contain 8195b7417018 but not
EP regulator support.
> ret = brcm_set_regulators(pcie, TURN_ON);
> if (ret)
> @@ -1535,7 +1537,9 @@ static int brcm_pcie_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>
> ret = brcm_pcie_get_regulators(pcie);
> if (ret) {
> - dev_err(pcie->dev, "failed to get regulators (err=%d)\n", ret);
> + pcie->num_supplies = 0;
> + if (ret != -EPROBE_DEFER)
> + dev_err(pcie->dev, "failed to get regulators (err=%d)\n", ret);
Looks like this hunk might belong somewhere else, e.g., in patch 2/6?
The "Fixes:" line suggests that this patch could/should be backported to
every kernel that contains 8195b7417018, but 8195b7417018 doesn't have
pcie->num_supplies.
> goto fail;
> }
>
> --
> 2.17.1
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists