[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <a5cb8869bbc342c2a1451a63bf6ce0d9@realtek.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2023 03:29:57 +0000
From: James Tai [戴志峰] <james.tai@...ltek.com>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>,
"Rob
Herring" <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski
<krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>
CC: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
kernel test robot
<lkp@...el.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v3 6/6] irqchip: Introduce RTD1619B support using the Realtek common interrupt controller driver
Hi Thomas,
>On Wed, Nov 29 2023 at 13:43, James Tai wrote:
>> +static int realtek_intc_rtd1619b_suspend(struct device *dev) {
>> + struct realtek_intc_data *data = dev_get_drvdata(dev);
>> + const struct realtek_intc_info *info = data->info;
>> +
>> + data->saved_en = readl(data->base + info->scpu_int_en_offset);
>> +
>> + writel(DISABLE_INTC, data->base + info->scpu_int_en_offset);
>> + writel(CLEAN_INTC_STATUS, data->base + info->umsk_isr_offset);
>> + writel(CLEAN_INTC_STATUS, data->base + info->isr_offset);
>> +
>> + return 0;
>> +}
>> +
>> +static int realtek_intc_rtd1619b_resume(struct device *dev) {
>> + struct realtek_intc_data *data = dev_get_drvdata(dev);
>> + const struct realtek_intc_info *info = data->info;
>> +
>> + writel(CLEAN_INTC_STATUS, data->base + info->umsk_isr_offset);
>> + writel(CLEAN_INTC_STATUS, data->base + info->isr_offset);
>> + writel(data->saved_en, data->base + info->scpu_int_en_offset);
>> +
>> + return 0;
>> +}
>> +
>> +static const struct dev_pm_ops realtek_intc_rtd1619b_pm_ops = {
>> + .suspend_noirq = realtek_intc_rtd1619b_suspend,
>> + .resume_noirq = realtek_intc_rtd1619b_resume, };
>
>So this is the 4th copy of the same code, really? Why is this not part of the
>common code?
>
Yes it is the same code.
I had originally assumed that each platform would require some different settings,
but I've realized that there is no such requirement in the current architecture.
I will move this part to the common code.
Thanks for your feedback.
Regards,
James
Powered by blists - more mailing lists