From: Pankaj Dubey <pankaj.dubey@samsung.com> To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@samsung.com>, linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Cc: kgene.kim@samsung.com, p.fedin@samsung.com, thomas.ab@samsung.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 6/8] drivers: soc: add support for exynos SROM driver Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2015 09:16:52 +0530 [thread overview] Message-ID: <5625B92C.10505@samsung.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <56258683.7070204@samsung.com> Hi Krzysztof, On Tuesday 20 October 2015 05:40 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 19.10.2015 20:46, Pankaj Dubey wrote: >> This patch adds Exynos SROM controller driver which will handle >> save restore of SROM registers during S2R. >> >> Signed-off-by: Pankaj Dubey <pankaj.dubey@samsung.com> >> --- >> drivers/soc/Kconfig | 1 + >> drivers/soc/Makefile | 1 + >> drivers/soc/samsung/Kconfig | 13 +++ >> drivers/soc/samsung/Makefile | 1 + >> drivers/soc/samsung/exynos-srom.c | 179 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> drivers/soc/samsung/exynos-srom.h | 51 +++++++++++ >> 6 files changed, 246 insertions(+) >> create mode 100644 drivers/soc/samsung/Kconfig >> create mode 100644 drivers/soc/samsung/Makefile >> create mode 100644 drivers/soc/samsung/exynos-srom.c >> create mode 100644 drivers/soc/samsung/exynos-srom.h >> >> diff --git a/drivers/soc/Kconfig b/drivers/soc/Kconfig >> index 96ddecb..69107c9 100644 >> --- a/drivers/soc/Kconfig >> +++ b/drivers/soc/Kconfig >> @@ -2,6 +2,7 @@ menu "SOC (System On Chip) specific Drivers" >> >> source "drivers/soc/mediatek/Kconfig" >> source "drivers/soc/qcom/Kconfig" >> +source "drivers/soc/samsung/Kconfig" >> source "drivers/soc/sunxi/Kconfig" >> source "drivers/soc/ti/Kconfig" >> source "drivers/soc/versatile/Kconfig" >> diff --git a/drivers/soc/Makefile b/drivers/soc/Makefile >> index 0b12d77..a623616 100644 >> --- a/drivers/soc/Makefile >> +++ b/drivers/soc/Makefile >> @@ -5,6 +5,7 @@ >> obj-$(CONFIG_MACH_DOVE) += dove/ >> obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_MEDIATEK) += mediatek/ >> obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_QCOM) += qcom/ >> +obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_SAMSUNG) += samsung/ >> obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_SUNXI) += sunxi/ >> obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_TEGRA) += tegra/ >> obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_TI) += ti/ >> diff --git a/drivers/soc/samsung/Kconfig b/drivers/soc/samsung/Kconfig >> new file mode 100644 >> index 0000000..ea4bc2a >> --- /dev/null >> +++ b/drivers/soc/samsung/Kconfig >> @@ -0,0 +1,13 @@ >> +# >> +# SAMSUNG SoC drivers >> +# >> +menu "Samsung SOC driver support" >> + >> +config SOC_SAMSUNG >> + bool >> + >> +config EXYNOS_SROM >> + bool >> + depends on ARM && ARCH_EXYNOS > > When !PM then the driver will... do nothing, right? So maybe make it > depending on PM so tiny configs would benefit? > Yes. Currently driver will do nothing if !PM. But as we know Fedin, has a plan to extend this driver for auxiliary H/W IP hooked to SROM. So in that case this dependency will not be valid as those functionality may not be dependent on PM, and we may need to remove it later. So I feel better not to add it at first place itself. >> +static int exynos_srom_remove(struct platform_device *pdev) >> +{ >> + struct exynos_srom *srom = platform_get_drvdata(pdev); >> + >> + kfree(srom->reg_offset); >> + iounmap(srom->reg_base); >> + srom->reg_base = NULL; >> + srom->reg_offset = NULL; > > There is no need anymore for these two NULL-s. It made sense only in > previous code when these were global variables. At this point the device > callbacks cannot be accessed so NULL-ifying does not change anything. > Agreed. Will update. > Rest from my point of view looks good. > Thanks for review. Pankaj > Best regards, > Krzysztof > >
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: pankaj.dubey@samsung.com (Pankaj Dubey) To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Subject: [PATCH v4 6/8] drivers: soc: add support for exynos SROM driver Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2015 09:16:52 +0530 [thread overview] Message-ID: <5625B92C.10505@samsung.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <56258683.7070204@samsung.com> Hi Krzysztof, On Tuesday 20 October 2015 05:40 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 19.10.2015 20:46, Pankaj Dubey wrote: >> This patch adds Exynos SROM controller driver which will handle >> save restore of SROM registers during S2R. >> >> Signed-off-by: Pankaj Dubey <pankaj.dubey@samsung.com> >> --- >> drivers/soc/Kconfig | 1 + >> drivers/soc/Makefile | 1 + >> drivers/soc/samsung/Kconfig | 13 +++ >> drivers/soc/samsung/Makefile | 1 + >> drivers/soc/samsung/exynos-srom.c | 179 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> drivers/soc/samsung/exynos-srom.h | 51 +++++++++++ >> 6 files changed, 246 insertions(+) >> create mode 100644 drivers/soc/samsung/Kconfig >> create mode 100644 drivers/soc/samsung/Makefile >> create mode 100644 drivers/soc/samsung/exynos-srom.c >> create mode 100644 drivers/soc/samsung/exynos-srom.h >> >> diff --git a/drivers/soc/Kconfig b/drivers/soc/Kconfig >> index 96ddecb..69107c9 100644 >> --- a/drivers/soc/Kconfig >> +++ b/drivers/soc/Kconfig >> @@ -2,6 +2,7 @@ menu "SOC (System On Chip) specific Drivers" >> >> source "drivers/soc/mediatek/Kconfig" >> source "drivers/soc/qcom/Kconfig" >> +source "drivers/soc/samsung/Kconfig" >> source "drivers/soc/sunxi/Kconfig" >> source "drivers/soc/ti/Kconfig" >> source "drivers/soc/versatile/Kconfig" >> diff --git a/drivers/soc/Makefile b/drivers/soc/Makefile >> index 0b12d77..a623616 100644 >> --- a/drivers/soc/Makefile >> +++ b/drivers/soc/Makefile >> @@ -5,6 +5,7 @@ >> obj-$(CONFIG_MACH_DOVE) += dove/ >> obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_MEDIATEK) += mediatek/ >> obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_QCOM) += qcom/ >> +obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_SAMSUNG) += samsung/ >> obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_SUNXI) += sunxi/ >> obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_TEGRA) += tegra/ >> obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_TI) += ti/ >> diff --git a/drivers/soc/samsung/Kconfig b/drivers/soc/samsung/Kconfig >> new file mode 100644 >> index 0000000..ea4bc2a >> --- /dev/null >> +++ b/drivers/soc/samsung/Kconfig >> @@ -0,0 +1,13 @@ >> +# >> +# SAMSUNG SoC drivers >> +# >> +menu "Samsung SOC driver support" >> + >> +config SOC_SAMSUNG >> + bool >> + >> +config EXYNOS_SROM >> + bool >> + depends on ARM && ARCH_EXYNOS > > When !PM then the driver will... do nothing, right? So maybe make it > depending on PM so tiny configs would benefit? > Yes. Currently driver will do nothing if !PM. But as we know Fedin, has a plan to extend this driver for auxiliary H/W IP hooked to SROM. So in that case this dependency will not be valid as those functionality may not be dependent on PM, and we may need to remove it later. So I feel better not to add it at first place itself. >> +static int exynos_srom_remove(struct platform_device *pdev) >> +{ >> + struct exynos_srom *srom = platform_get_drvdata(pdev); >> + >> + kfree(srom->reg_offset); >> + iounmap(srom->reg_base); >> + srom->reg_base = NULL; >> + srom->reg_offset = NULL; > > There is no need anymore for these two NULL-s. It made sense only in > previous code when these were global variables. At this point the device > callbacks cannot be accessed so NULL-ifying does not change anything. > Agreed. Will update. > Rest from my point of view looks good. > Thanks for review. Pankaj > Best regards, > Krzysztof > >
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-10-20 3:47 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 42+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2015-10-19 11:46 [PATCH v4 0/8] Add support for Exynos SROM Controller driver Pankaj Dubey 2015-10-19 11:46 ` Pankaj Dubey 2015-10-19 11:46 ` [PATCH v4 1/8] ARM: EXYNOS: remove unused static mapping of CMU for exynos5 Pankaj Dubey 2015-10-19 11:46 ` Pankaj Dubey 2015-10-19 11:46 ` [PATCH v4 2/8] ARM: EXYNOS: code cleanup in map.h Pankaj Dubey 2015-10-19 11:46 ` Pankaj Dubey 2015-10-19 11:46 ` [PATCH v4 3/8] Documentation: dt-bindings: add exynos-srom binding information Pankaj Dubey 2015-10-19 11:46 ` Pankaj Dubey 2015-10-19 11:46 ` [PATCH v4 4/8] ARM: dts: add SROM device node for exynos4 Pankaj Dubey 2015-10-19 11:46 ` Pankaj Dubey 2015-10-19 11:46 ` [PATCH v4 5/8] ARM: dts: add SROM device node for exynos5 Pankaj Dubey 2015-10-19 11:46 ` Pankaj Dubey 2015-10-19 11:46 ` [PATCH v4 6/8] drivers: soc: add support for exynos SROM driver Pankaj Dubey 2015-10-19 11:46 ` Pankaj Dubey 2015-10-20 0:10 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski 2015-10-20 0:10 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski 2015-10-20 3:46 ` Pankaj Dubey [this message] 2015-10-20 3:46 ` Pankaj Dubey 2015-10-20 4:18 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski 2015-10-20 4:18 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski 2015-10-20 6:33 ` Pavel Fedin 2015-10-20 6:33 ` Pavel Fedin 2015-10-20 6:48 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski 2015-10-20 6:48 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski 2015-10-20 8:17 ` Pavel Fedin 2015-10-20 8:17 ` Pavel Fedin 2015-10-20 8:27 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski 2015-10-20 8:27 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski 2015-10-20 8:21 ` Pankaj Dubey 2015-10-20 8:21 ` Pankaj Dubey 2015-10-20 8:20 ` Andi Shyti 2015-10-20 8:20 ` Andi Shyti 2015-10-21 7:32 ` Pavel Fedin 2015-10-21 7:32 ` Pavel Fedin 2015-10-19 11:46 ` [PATCH v4 7/8] MAINTAINERS: add maintainers entry for drivers/soc/samsung Pankaj Dubey 2015-10-19 11:46 ` Pankaj Dubey 2015-10-20 0:07 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski 2015-10-20 0:07 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski 2015-10-19 11:46 ` [PATCH v4 8/8] ARM: EXYNOS: Remove SROM related register settings from mach-exynos Pankaj Dubey 2015-10-19 11:46 ` Pankaj Dubey 2015-10-20 0:13 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski 2015-10-20 0:13 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
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=5625B92C.10505@samsung.com \ --to=pankaj.dubey@samsung.com \ --cc=k.kozlowski@samsung.com \ --cc=kgene.kim@samsung.com \ --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \ --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=p.fedin@samsung.com \ --cc=thomas.ab@samsung.com \ /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: linkBe 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.