Hi!

> > > +void rpcif_enable_rpm(struct rpcif *rpc)
> > > +{
> > > +	pm_runtime_enable(rpc->dev);
> > > +}
> > > +EXPORT_SYMBOL(rpcif_enable_rpm);
> > > +
> > > +void rpcif_disable_rpm(struct rpcif *rpc)
> > > +{
> > > +	pm_runtime_put_sync(rpc->dev);
> > > +}
> > > +EXPORT_SYMBOL(rpcif_disable_rpm);
> > 
> > Should these go to header as static inlines?
> > 
> Would be nice will make them inline and squash it in the current
> patch.

For this series, maybe squashing is not neccessary. It is pretty good
as-is.

> > > +static int wait_msg_xfer_end(struct rpcif *rpc)
> > > +{
> > > +	u32 sts;
> > > +
> > > +	return regmap_read_poll_timeout(rpc->regmap, RPCIF_CMNSR, sts,
> > > +					sts & RPCIF_CMNSR_TEND, 0,
> > > +					USEC_PER_SEC);
> > > +}
> > 
> > This can't be right. sts is used uninitialized here.
> > 
> Third parameter in regmap_read_poll_timeout() is the variable in which value is read and the fourth parameter condition has to be tied with the third parameter (there are similar instance in the kernel).
>

Okay, that's some rather evil code. It should really be
REGMAP_READ_POLL_TIMEOUT, because it is macro with weird semantics.

Best regards,
								Pavel
-- 
DENX Software Engineering GmbH,      Managing Director: Wolfgang Denk
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany