[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAE-0n52KfpfnxsC5SKvR9zWWONmh2oyD3cS9L-8-J1RHHzKSdQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2022 19:13:32 -0600
From: Stephen Boyd <swboyd@...omium.org>
To: Kuogee Hsieh <quic_khsieh@...cinc.com>, agross@...nel.org,
airlied@...ux.ie, bjorn.andersson@...aro.org, daniel@...ll.ch,
dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org, dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org,
robdclark@...il.com, sean@...rly.run, vkoul@...nel.org
Cc: quic_abhinavk@...cinc.com, aravindh@...eaurora.org,
quic_sbillaka@...cinc.com, freedreno@...ts.freedesktop.org,
linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v17 1/4] drm/msm/dp: do not initialize phy until plugin
interrupt received
Quoting Kuogee Hsieh (2022-01-14 16:58:32)
> @@ -1363,14 +1368,14 @@ static int dp_pm_suspend(struct device *dev)
> if (dp_power_clk_status(dp->power, DP_CTRL_PM))
> dp_ctrl_off_link_stream(dp->ctrl);
>
> + dp_display_host_phy_exit(dp);
> +
> + /* host_init will be called at pm_resume */
> dp_display_host_deinit(dp);
> }
I thought we determined that core_initialized was always true here, so
the if condition is redundant. Furthermore, removing that check allows
us to entirely remove the core_initialized variable from the code.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists