From: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@codeaurora.org>
To: Kiran Gunda <kgunda@codeaurora.org>
Cc: Abhijeet Dharmapurikar <adharmap@codeaurora.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
David Collins <collinsd@codeaurora.org>,
Subbaraman Narayanamurthy <subbaram@codeaurora.org>,
Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@wanadoo.fr>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org,
adharmap@quicinc.com, aghayal@qti.qualcomm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH V1 02/15] spmi: pmic-arb: rename spmi_pmic_arb_dev to spmi_pmic_arb
Date: Tue, 30 May 2017 17:46:37 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170531004637.GT20170@codeaurora.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1496147943-25822-3-git-send-email-kgunda@codeaurora.org>
On 05/30, Kiran Gunda wrote:
> From: Abhijeet Dharmapurikar <adharmap@codeaurora.org>
>
> Usually *_dev best used for structures that embed a struct device in
> them. spmi_pmic_arb_dev doesn't embed one. It is simply a driver data
> structure. Use an appropriate name for it.
>
> Also there are many places in the driver that left shift the bit to
> generate a bit mask. Replace it with the BIT() macro.
That would be a different patch because the subject doesn't even
mention this.
>
> Signed-off-by: Abhijeet Dharmapurikar <adharmap@codeaurora.org>
> Signed-off-by: Kiran Gunda <kgunda@codeaurora.org>
> ---
> drivers/spmi/spmi-pmic-arb.c | 164 +++++++++++++++++++++----------------------
Would also be nice if you ran scripts/objdiff on this so we can
be confident the code didn't change.
> 1 file changed, 82 insertions(+), 82 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/spmi/spmi-pmic-arb.c b/drivers/spmi/spmi-pmic-arb.c
> index df463d4..7f918ea 100644
> --- a/drivers/spmi/spmi-pmic-arb.c
> +++ b/drivers/spmi/spmi-pmic-arb.c
> @@ -58,10 +58,10 @@
>
> /* Channel Status fields */
> enum pmic_arb_chnl_status {
> - PMIC_ARB_STATUS_DONE = (1 << 0),
> - PMIC_ARB_STATUS_FAILURE = (1 << 1),
> - PMIC_ARB_STATUS_DENIED = (1 << 2),
> - PMIC_ARB_STATUS_DROPPED = (1 << 3),
> + PMIC_ARB_STATUS_DONE = BIT(0),
> + PMIC_ARB_STATUS_FAILURE = BIT(1),
> + PMIC_ARB_STATUS_DENIED = BIT(2),
> + PMIC_ARB_STATUS_DROPPED = BIT(3),
> };
>
> /* Command register fields */
> @@ -99,7 +99,7 @@ enum pmic_arb_cmd_op_code {
> struct pmic_arb_ver_ops;
>
> /**
> - * spmi_pmic_arb_dev - SPMI PMIC Arbiter object
> + * spmi_pmic_arb - SPMI PMIC Arbiter object
> *
> * @rd_base: on v1 "core", on v2 "observer" register base off DT.
> * @wr_base: on v1 "core", on v2 "chnls" register base off DT.
> @@ -120,7 +120,7 @@ enum pmic_arb_cmd_op_code {
> * @ppid_to_chan in-memory copy of PPID -> channel (APID) mapping table.
> * v2 only.
> */
> -struct spmi_pmic_arb_dev {
> +struct spmi_pmic_arb {
> void __iomem *rd_base;
> void __iomem *wr_base;
> void __iomem *intr;
> @@ -164,10 +164,10 @@ struct spmi_pmic_arb_dev {
> * on v2 offset of SPMI_PIC_IRQ_CLEARn.
> */
> struct pmic_arb_ver_ops {
> - int (*mode)(struct spmi_pmic_arb_dev *dev, u8 sid, u16 addr,
> + int (*mode)(struct spmi_pmic_arb *dev, u8 sid, u16 addr,
But we leave dev here? I'm losing faith that this patch is
worthwhile.
> mode_t *mode);
> /* spmi commands (read_cmd, write_cmd, cmd) functionality */
> - int (*offset)(struct spmi_pmic_arb_dev *dev, u8 sid, u16 addr,
> + int (*offset)(struct spmi_pmic_arb *dev, u8 sid, u16 addr,
> u32 *offset);
> u32 (*fmt_cmd)(u8 opc, u8 sid, u16 addr, u8 bc);
> int (*non_data_cmd)(struct spmi_controller *ctrl, u8 opc, u8 sid);
> @@ -178,16 +178,16 @@ struct pmic_arb_ver_ops {
> u32 (*irq_clear)(u8 n);
> };
>
> -static inline void pmic_arb_base_write(struct spmi_pmic_arb_dev *dev,
> +static inline void pmic_arb_base_write(struct spmi_pmic_arb *pa,
> u32 offset, u32 val)
> {
> - writel_relaxed(val, dev->wr_base + offset);
> + writel_relaxed(val, pa->wr_base + offset);
"pa" is a little confusing with things like physical address and
such. I would have gone for "arb", but the code is written
already, so why change it now?
> }
>
> -static inline void pmic_arb_set_rd_cmd(struct spmi_pmic_arb_dev *dev,
> +static inline void pmic_arb_set_rd_cmd(struct spmi_pmic_arb *pa,
> u32 offset, u32 val)
> {
> - writel_relaxed(val, dev->rd_base + offset);
> + writel_relaxed(val, pa->rd_base + offset);
> }
>
> /**
> @@ -196,9 +196,10 @@ static inline void pmic_arb_set_rd_cmd(struct spmi_pmic_arb_dev *dev,
> * @reg: register's address
> * @buf: output parameter, length must be bc + 1
> */
> -static void pa_read_data(struct spmi_pmic_arb_dev *dev, u8 *buf, u32 reg, u8 bc)
> +static void pa_read_data(struct spmi_pmic_arb *pa, u8 *buf, u32 reg, u8 bc)
In fact, I would rename these pa_{read,write}_data() functions as
pmic_arb_{read,write}_data() to be consistent. These are the only
places "pa_" is used right now.
> {
> - u32 data = __raw_readl(dev->rd_base + reg);
> + u32 data = __raw_readl(pa->rd_base + reg);
> +
> memcpy(buf, &data, (bc & 3) + 1);
> }
>
> @@ -209,23 +210,24 @@ static void pa_read_data(struct spmi_pmic_arb_dev *dev, u8 *buf, u32 reg, u8 bc)
> * @buf: buffer to write. length must be bc + 1.
> */
> static void
> -pa_write_data(struct spmi_pmic_arb_dev *dev, const u8 *buf, u32 reg, u8 bc)
> +pa_write_data(struct spmi_pmic_arb *pa, const u8 *buf, u32 reg, u8 bc)
> {
> u32 data = 0;
> +
> memcpy(&data, buf, (bc & 3) + 1);
> - __raw_writel(data, dev->wr_base + reg);
> + pmic_arb_base_write(pa, reg, data);
This is an unrelated change. Not sure what's going on with this
diff but we most likely want to keep the __raw_writel() here. See
how renames introduce bugs and why we don't value them?
> }
>
> @@ -270,22 +272,22 @@ static int pmic_arb_wait_for_done(struct spmi_controller *ctrl,
> static int
> pmic_arb_non_data_cmd_v1(struct spmi_controller *ctrl, u8 opc, u8 sid)
> {
> - struct spmi_pmic_arb_dev *pmic_arb = spmi_controller_get_drvdata(ctrl);
> + struct spmi_pmic_arb *pa = spmi_controller_get_drvdata(ctrl);
> unsigned long flags;
> u32 cmd;
> int rc;
> u32 offset;
>
> - rc = pmic_arb->ver_ops->offset(pmic_arb, sid, 0, &offset);
> + rc = pa->ver_ops->offset(pa, sid, 0, &offset);
> if (rc)
> return rc;
>
> cmd = ((opc | 0x40) << 27) | ((sid & 0xf) << 20);
>
> - raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&pmic_arb->lock, flags);
> - pmic_arb_base_write(pmic_arb, offset + PMIC_ARB_CMD, cmd);
> - rc = pmic_arb_wait_for_done(ctrl, pmic_arb->wr_base, sid, 0);
> - raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&pmic_arb->lock, flags);
> + raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&pa->lock, flags);
> + pmic_arb_base_write(pa, offset + PMIC_ARB_CMD, cmd);
> + rc = pmic_arb_wait_for_done(ctrl, pa->wr_base, sid, 0);
> + raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&pa->lock, flags);
>
> return rc;
Yeah pmic_arb sounds fine too. Not sure why we changed anything
in this function.
> }
> @@ -299,7 +301,7 @@ static int pmic_arb_wait_for_done(struct spmi_controller *ctrl,
> /* Non-data command */
> static int pmic_arb_cmd(struct spmi_controller *ctrl, u8 opc, u8 sid)
> {
> - struct spmi_pmic_arb_dev *pmic_arb = spmi_controller_get_drvdata(ctrl);
> + struct spmi_pmic_arb *pa = spmi_controller_get_drvdata(ctrl);
>
> dev_dbg(&ctrl->dev, "cmd op:0x%x sid:%d\n", opc, sid);
>
> @@ -307,13 +309,13 @@ static int pmic_arb_cmd(struct spmi_controller *ctrl, u8 opc, u8 sid)
> if (opc < SPMI_CMD_RESET || opc > SPMI_CMD_WAKEUP)
> return -EINVAL;
>
> - return pmic_arb->ver_ops->non_data_cmd(ctrl, opc, sid);
> + return pa->ver_ops->non_data_cmd(ctrl, opc, sid);
Same story...
> }
>
> static int pmic_arb_read_cmd(struct spmi_controller *ctrl, u8 opc, u8 sid,
> u16 addr, u8 *buf, size_t len)
> {
> - struct spmi_pmic_arb_dev *pmic_arb = spmi_controller_get_drvdata(ctrl);
> + struct spmi_pmic_arb *pa = spmi_controller_get_drvdata(ctrl);
> unsigned long flags;
> u8 bc = len - 1;
> u32 cmd;
> @@ -321,16 +323,16 @@ static int pmic_arb_read_cmd(struct spmi_controller *ctrl, u8 opc, u8 sid,
> u32 offset;
> mode_t mode;
>
> - rc = pmic_arb->ver_ops->offset(pmic_arb, sid, addr, &offset);
> + rc = pa->ver_ops->offset(pa, sid, addr, &offset);
> if (rc)
> return rc;
>
> - rc = pmic_arb->ver_ops->mode(pmic_arb, sid, addr, &mode);
> + rc = pa->ver_ops->mode(pa, sid, addr, &mode);
> if (rc)
> return rc;
>
> if (!(mode & S_IRUSR)) {
> - dev_err(&pmic_arb->spmic->dev,
> + dev_err(&pa->spmic->dev,
> "error: impermissible read from peripheral sid:%d addr:0x%x\n",
> sid, addr);
> return -EPERM;
> @@ -353,30 +355,29 @@ static int pmic_arb_read_cmd(struct spmi_controller *ctrl, u8 opc, u8 sid,
> else
> return -EINVAL;
>
> - cmd = pmic_arb->ver_ops->fmt_cmd(opc, sid, addr, bc);
> + cmd = pa->ver_ops->fmt_cmd(opc, sid, addr, bc);
>
> - raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&pmic_arb->lock, flags);
> - pmic_arb_set_rd_cmd(pmic_arb, offset + PMIC_ARB_CMD, cmd);
> - rc = pmic_arb_wait_for_done(ctrl, pmic_arb->rd_base, sid, addr);
> + raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&pa->lock, flags);
> + pmic_arb_set_rd_cmd(pa, offset + PMIC_ARB_CMD, cmd);
> + rc = pmic_arb_wait_for_done(ctrl, pa->rd_base, sid, addr);
> if (rc)
> goto done;
>
> - pa_read_data(pmic_arb, buf, offset + PMIC_ARB_RDATA0,
> + pa_read_data(pa, buf, offset + PMIC_ARB_RDATA0,
> min_t(u8, bc, 3));
>
> if (bc > 3)
> - pa_read_data(pmic_arb, buf + 4,
> - offset + PMIC_ARB_RDATA1, bc - 4);
> + pa_read_data(pa, buf + 4, offset + PMIC_ARB_RDATA1, bc - 4);
>
> done:
> - raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&pmic_arb->lock, flags);
> + raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&pa->lock, flags);
> return rc;
> }
>
> static int pmic_arb_write_cmd(struct spmi_controller *ctrl, u8 opc, u8 sid,
> u16 addr, const u8 *buf, size_t len)
> {
> - struct spmi_pmic_arb_dev *pmic_arb = spmi_controller_get_drvdata(ctrl);
> + struct spmi_pmic_arb *pa = spmi_controller_get_drvdata(ctrl);
> unsigned long flags;
> u8 bc = len - 1;
> u32 cmd;
> @@ -384,16 +385,16 @@ static int pmic_arb_write_cmd(struct spmi_controller *ctrl, u8 opc, u8 sid,
> u32 offset;
> mode_t mode;
>
> - rc = pmic_arb->ver_ops->offset(pmic_arb, sid, addr, &offset);
> + rc = pa->ver_ops->offset(pa, sid, addr, &offset);
> if (rc)
> return rc;
>
> - rc = pmic_arb->ver_ops->mode(pmic_arb, sid, addr, &mode);
> + rc = pa->ver_ops->mode(pa, sid, addr, &mode);
> if (rc)
> return rc;
>
> if (!(mode & S_IWUSR)) {
> - dev_err(&pmic_arb->spmic->dev,
> + dev_err(&pa->spmic->dev,
> "error: impermissible write to peripheral sid:%d addr:0x%x\n",
> sid, addr);
> return -EPERM;
> @@ -418,20 +419,18 @@ static int pmic_arb_write_cmd(struct spmi_controller *ctrl, u8 opc, u8 sid,
> else
> return -EINVAL;
>
> - cmd = pmic_arb->ver_ops->fmt_cmd(opc, sid, addr, bc);
> + cmd = pa->ver_ops->fmt_cmd(opc, sid, addr, bc);
>
> /* Write data to FIFOs */
> - raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&pmic_arb->lock, flags);
> - pa_write_data(pmic_arb, buf, offset + PMIC_ARB_WDATA0,
> - min_t(u8, bc, 3));
> + raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&pa->lock, flags);
> + pa_write_data(pa, buf, offset + PMIC_ARB_WDATA0, min_t(u8, bc, 3));
> if (bc > 3)
> - pa_write_data(pmic_arb, buf + 4,
> - offset + PMIC_ARB_WDATA1, bc - 4);
> + pa_write_data(pa, buf + 4, offset + PMIC_ARB_WDATA1, bc - 4);
>
> /* Start the transaction */
> - pmic_arb_base_write(pmic_arb, offset + PMIC_ARB_CMD, cmd);
> - rc = pmic_arb_wait_for_done(ctrl, pmic_arb->wr_base, sid, addr);
> - raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&pmic_arb->lock, flags);
> + pmic_arb_base_write(pa, offset + PMIC_ARB_CMD, cmd);
> + rc = pmic_arb_wait_for_done(ctrl, pa->wr_base, sid, addr);
> + raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&pa->lock, flags);
>
> return rc;
> }
Same story for all this diff.
> @@ -457,7 +456,7 @@ struct spmi_pmic_arb_qpnpint_type {
> static void qpnpint_spmi_write(struct irq_data *d, u8 reg, void *buf,
> size_t len)
> {
> - struct spmi_pmic_arb_dev *pa = irq_data_get_irq_chip_data(d);
> + struct spmi_pmic_arb *pa = irq_data_get_irq_chip_data(d);
> u8 sid = d->hwirq >> 24;
> u8 per = d->hwirq >> 16;
>
> @@ -470,7 +469,7 @@ static void qpnpint_spmi_write(struct irq_data *d, u8 reg, void *buf,
>
> static void qpnpint_spmi_read(struct irq_data *d, u8 reg, void *buf, size_t len)
> {
> - struct spmi_pmic_arb_dev *pa = irq_data_get_irq_chip_data(d);
> + struct spmi_pmic_arb *pa = irq_data_get_irq_chip_data(d);
> u8 sid = d->hwirq >> 24;
> u8 per = d->hwirq >> 16;
>
> @@ -481,7 +480,7 @@ static void qpnpint_spmi_read(struct irq_data *d, u8 reg, void *buf, size_t len)
> d->irq);
> }
>
> -static void periph_interrupt(struct spmi_pmic_arb_dev *pa, u8 apid)
> +static void periph_interrupt(struct spmi_pmic_arb *pa, u8 apid)
> {
> unsigned int irq;
> u32 status;
> @@ -490,7 +489,7 @@ static void periph_interrupt(struct spmi_pmic_arb_dev *pa, u8 apid)
> status = readl_relaxed(pa->intr + pa->ver_ops->irq_status(apid));
> while (status) {
> id = ffs(status) - 1;
> - status &= ~(1 << id);
> + status &= ~BIT(id);
> irq = irq_find_mapping(pa->domain,
> pa->apid_to_ppid[apid] << 16
> | id << 8
> @@ -501,7 +500,7 @@ static void periph_interrupt(struct spmi_pmic_arb_dev *pa, u8 apid)
>
> static void pmic_arb_chained_irq(struct irq_desc *desc)
> {
> - struct spmi_pmic_arb_dev *pa = irq_desc_get_handler_data(desc);
> + struct spmi_pmic_arb *pa = irq_desc_get_handler_data(desc);
> struct irq_chip *chip = irq_desc_get_chip(desc);
> void __iomem *intr = pa->intr;
> int first = pa->min_apid >> 5;
> @@ -516,7 +515,7 @@ static void pmic_arb_chained_irq(struct irq_desc *desc)
> pa->ver_ops->owner_acc_status(pa->ee, i));
> while (status) {
> id = ffs(status) - 1;
> - status &= ~(1 << id);
> + status &= ~BIT(id);
> periph_interrupt(pa, id + i * 32);
> }
> }
> @@ -526,23 +525,23 @@ static void pmic_arb_chained_irq(struct irq_desc *desc)
>
> static void qpnpint_irq_ack(struct irq_data *d)
> {
> - struct spmi_pmic_arb_dev *pa = irq_data_get_irq_chip_data(d);
> + struct spmi_pmic_arb *pa = irq_data_get_irq_chip_data(d);
> u8 irq = d->hwirq >> 8;
> u8 apid = d->hwirq;
> unsigned long flags;
> u8 data;
>
> raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&pa->lock, flags);
> - writel_relaxed(1 << irq, pa->intr + pa->ver_ops->irq_clear(apid));
> + writel_relaxed(BIT(irq), pa->intr + pa->ver_ops->irq_clear(apid));
> raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&pa->lock, flags);
>
> - data = 1 << irq;
> + data = BIT(irq);
> qpnpint_spmi_write(d, QPNPINT_REG_LATCHED_CLR, &data, 1);
> }
>
> static void qpnpint_irq_mask(struct irq_data *d)
> {
> - struct spmi_pmic_arb_dev *pa = irq_data_get_irq_chip_data(d);
> + struct spmi_pmic_arb *pa = irq_data_get_irq_chip_data(d);
> u8 irq = d->hwirq >> 8;
> u8 apid = d->hwirq;
> unsigned long flags;
> @@ -558,13 +557,13 @@ static void qpnpint_irq_mask(struct irq_data *d)
> }
> raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&pa->lock, flags);
>
> - data = 1 << irq;
> + data = BIT(irq);
> qpnpint_spmi_write(d, QPNPINT_REG_EN_CLR, &data, 1);
> }
>
> static void qpnpint_irq_unmask(struct irq_data *d)
> {
> - struct spmi_pmic_arb_dev *pa = irq_data_get_irq_chip_data(d);
> + struct spmi_pmic_arb *pa = irq_data_get_irq_chip_data(d);
> u8 irq = d->hwirq >> 8;
> u8 apid = d->hwirq;
> unsigned long flags;
> @@ -579,7 +578,7 @@ static void qpnpint_irq_unmask(struct irq_data *d)
> }
> raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&pa->lock, flags);
>
> - data = 1 << irq;
> + data = BIT(irq);
> qpnpint_spmi_write(d, QPNPINT_REG_EN_SET, &data, 1);
> }
>
> @@ -590,7 +589,7 @@ static void qpnpint_irq_enable(struct irq_data *d)
>
> qpnpint_irq_unmask(d);
>
> - data = 1 << irq;
> + data = BIT(irq);
> qpnpint_spmi_write(d, QPNPINT_REG_LATCHED_CLR, &data, 1);
> }
>
> @@ -598,25 +597,26 @@ static int qpnpint_irq_set_type(struct irq_data *d, unsigned int flow_type)
> {
> struct spmi_pmic_arb_qpnpint_type type;
> u8 irq = d->hwirq >> 8;
> + u8 bit_mask_irq = BIT(irq);
Why the local variable? Just do the ~BIT(irq) thing in place and
let the compiler take care of the hoist?
>
> qpnpint_spmi_read(d, QPNPINT_REG_SET_TYPE, &type, sizeof(type));
>
> if (flow_type & (IRQF_TRIGGER_RISING | IRQF_TRIGGER_FALLING)) {
> - type.type |= 1 << irq;
> + type.type |= bit_mask_irq;
> if (flow_type & IRQF_TRIGGER_RISING)
> - type.polarity_high |= 1 << irq;
> + type.polarity_high |= bit_mask_irq;
> if (flow_type & IRQF_TRIGGER_FALLING)
> - type.polarity_low |= 1 << irq;
> + type.polarity_low |= bit_mask_irq;
> } else {
> if ((flow_type & (IRQF_TRIGGER_HIGH)) &&
> (flow_type & (IRQF_TRIGGER_LOW)))
> return -EINVAL;
>
> - type.type &= ~(1 << irq); /* level trig */
> + type.type &= ~bit_mask_irq; /* level trig */
> if (flow_type & IRQF_TRIGGER_HIGH)
> - type.polarity_high |= 1 << irq;
> + type.polarity_high |= bit_mask_irq;
> else
> - type.polarity_low |= 1 << irq;
> + type.polarity_low |= bit_mask_irq;
> }
>
> qpnpint_spmi_write(d, QPNPINT_REG_SET_TYPE, &type, sizeof(type));
> @@ -657,7 +657,7 @@ struct spmi_pmic_arb_irq_spec {
Overall I see little to no value with this patch. I suggest you
drop the rename. The BIT() thing may be ok, but again, not sure
there's any benefit.
--
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-05-31 0:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 62+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-05-30 12:38 [PATCH V1 00/15]: support for spmi_pmic_arb v3/v5 and bug fixes Kiran Gunda
2017-05-30 12:38 ` Kiran Gunda
2017-05-30 12:38 ` [PATCH V1 01/15] spmi: pmic_arb: block access of invalid read and writes Kiran Gunda
2017-05-31 0:33 ` Stephen Boyd
2017-06-12 11:26 ` kgunda
2017-06-13 2:09 ` Stephen Boyd
2017-06-14 15:09 ` kgunda
2017-05-30 12:38 ` [PATCH V1 02/15] spmi: pmic-arb: rename spmi_pmic_arb_dev to spmi_pmic_arb Kiran Gunda
2017-05-31 0:46 ` Stephen Boyd [this message]
2017-06-01 16:11 ` kgunda
2017-06-02 18:29 ` Stephen Boyd
2017-06-05 6:28 ` kgunda
2017-05-30 12:38 ` [PATCH V1 03/15] spmi: pmic-arb: fix inconsistent use of apid and chan Kiran Gunda
2017-05-31 1:31 ` Stephen Boyd
2017-06-01 16:37 ` kgunda
2017-05-30 12:38 ` [PATCH V1 04/15] spmi: pmic-arb: optimize table lookups Kiran Gunda
2017-05-31 1:44 ` Stephen Boyd
2017-06-01 16:53 ` kgunda
2017-06-02 18:31 ` Stephen Boyd
2017-06-05 6:33 ` kgunda
2017-05-30 12:38 ` [PATCH V1 05/15] spmi: pmic-arb: cleanup unrequested irqs Kiran Gunda
2017-05-31 1:57 ` Stephen Boyd
2017-06-06 10:50 ` kgunda
2017-06-13 2:11 ` Stephen Boyd
2017-06-14 15:04 ` kgunda
2017-05-30 12:38 ` [PATCH V1 06/15] spmi: pmic-arb: fix missing interrupts Kiran Gunda
2017-05-31 2:00 ` Stephen Boyd
2017-06-01 17:06 ` kgunda
2017-05-30 12:38 ` [PATCH V1 07/15] spmi: pmic-arb: clear the latched status of the interrupt Kiran Gunda
2017-05-31 22:03 ` Stephen Boyd
2017-06-06 10:55 ` kgunda
2017-05-30 12:38 ` [PATCH V1 08/15] spmi: pmic_arb: use appropriate flow handler Kiran Gunda
2017-05-31 19:03 ` Stephen Boyd
2017-06-06 10:57 ` kgunda
2017-05-30 12:38 ` [PATCH V1 09/15] spmi: pmic-arb: check apid enabled before calling the handler Kiran Gunda
2017-05-31 20:39 ` Stephen Boyd
2017-06-14 15:38 ` kgunda
2017-06-16 21:11 ` Stephen Boyd
2017-06-21 5:02 ` kgunda
2017-05-30 12:38 ` [PATCH V1 10/15] spmi: pmic_arb: add support for PMIC bus arbiter v3 Kiran Gunda
2017-05-31 22:18 ` Stephen Boyd
2017-06-06 11:10 ` kgunda
2017-05-30 12:38 ` [PATCH V1 11/15] spmi: spmi-pmic-arb: enable the SPMI interrupt as a wakeup source Kiran Gunda
2017-05-31 17:13 ` Stephen Boyd
2017-06-08 11:30 ` kgunda
2017-05-30 12:39 ` [PATCH V1 12/15] spmi-pmic-arb: fix a possible null pointer dereference Kiran Gunda
2017-05-31 17:29 ` Stephen Boyd
2017-06-02 7:13 ` kgunda
2017-05-30 12:39 ` [PATCH V1 13/15] spmi: pmic-arb: add support for HW version 5 Kiran Gunda
2017-06-01 6:08 ` Stephen Boyd
2017-06-08 11:28 ` kgunda
2017-05-30 12:39 ` [PATCH V1 14/15] spmi: pmic-arb: do not ack and clear peripheral interrupts in cleanup_irq Kiran Gunda
2017-05-30 22:23 ` kbuild test robot
2017-05-30 22:23 ` kbuild test robot
2017-05-31 17:53 ` Stephen Boyd
2017-06-02 7:26 ` kgunda
2017-06-06 11:27 ` kgunda
2017-06-13 2:10 ` Stephen Boyd
2017-07-18 11:53 ` kgunda
2017-05-30 12:39 ` [PATCH V1 15/15] spmi: pmic-arb: instantiate spmi_devices at arch_initcall Kiran Gunda
2017-05-31 22:07 ` Stephen Boyd
2017-07-18 11:49 ` kgunda
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20170531004637.GT20170@codeaurora.org \
--to=sboyd@codeaurora.org \
--cc=adharmap@codeaurora.org \
--cc=adharmap@quicinc.com \
--cc=aghayal@qti.qualcomm.com \
--cc=christophe.jaillet@wanadoo.fr \
--cc=collinsd@codeaurora.org \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=kgunda@codeaurora.org \
--cc=linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=subbaram@codeaurora.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.