From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from server19320154104.serverpool.info ([193.201.54.104]:50539 "EHLO hauke-m.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755766Ab2FJTiB (ORCPT ); Sun, 10 Jun 2012 15:38:01 -0400 Message-ID: <4FD4F793.2030507@hauke-m.de> (sfid-20120610_213806_084878_0EC09CD9) Date: Sun, 10 Jun 2012 21:37:55 +0200 From: Hauke Mehrtens MIME-Version: 1.0 To: =?UTF-8?B?UmFmYcWCIE1pxYJlY2tp?= CC: Florian Fainelli , linville@tuxdriver.com, b43-dev@lists.infradead.org, arend@broadcom.com, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/8] bcma: handle SoCs in pmu initialization References: <1338933307-13446-1-git-send-email-hauke@hauke-m.de> <1338933307-13446-7-git-send-email-hauke@hauke-m.de> <2716026.rMfCBzMpF9@flexo> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 06/10/2012 06:54 PM, Rafał Miłecki wrote: > 2012/6/6 Florian Fainelli : >> Hi Hauke, >> >> On Tuesday 05 June 2012 23:55:05 Hauke Mehrtens wrote: >>> The SoCs do not need any special handling in bcma_pmu_pll_init(), >>> bcma_pmu_resources_init(), bcma_pmu_swreg_init() and >>> bcma_pmu_workarounds. This patches suppresses some warnings in the log. >> >> This does not look like it scales very good, how about you turn the pr_err() >> into a pr_debug() so that developpers porting bcma on a new chip need to turn >> on the appropriate debug knobs to get the message? > > debug sounds fine for me > Hi Rafał, bcma_pmu_swreg_init() and bcma_pmu_pll_init() are doing nothing should they get removed? In the current version of the patch I also removed the chip ids of the PCIe based cards from the switch case statement if they just ended in a break, is that ok with you? Hauke From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Hauke Mehrtens Date: Sun, 10 Jun 2012 21:37:55 +0200 Subject: [PATCH 6/8] bcma: handle SoCs in pmu initialization In-Reply-To: References: <1338933307-13446-1-git-send-email-hauke@hauke-m.de> <1338933307-13446-7-git-send-email-hauke@hauke-m.de> <2716026.rMfCBzMpF9@flexo> Message-ID: <4FD4F793.2030507@hauke-m.de> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: =?UTF-8?B?UmFmYcWCIE1pxYJlY2tp?= Cc: Florian Fainelli , linville@tuxdriver.com, b43-dev@lists.infradead.org, arend@broadcom.com, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org On 06/10/2012 06:54 PM, Rafa? Mi?ecki wrote: > 2012/6/6 Florian Fainelli : >> Hi Hauke, >> >> On Tuesday 05 June 2012 23:55:05 Hauke Mehrtens wrote: >>> The SoCs do not need any special handling in bcma_pmu_pll_init(), >>> bcma_pmu_resources_init(), bcma_pmu_swreg_init() and >>> bcma_pmu_workarounds. This patches suppresses some warnings in the log. >> >> This does not look like it scales very good, how about you turn the pr_err() >> into a pr_debug() so that developpers porting bcma on a new chip need to turn >> on the appropriate debug knobs to get the message? > > debug sounds fine for me > Hi Rafa?, bcma_pmu_swreg_init() and bcma_pmu_pll_init() are doing nothing should they get removed? In the current version of the patch I also removed the chip ids of the PCIe based cards from the switch case statement if they just ended in a break, is that ok with you? Hauke