All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [PATCH] ARM: davinci: dm644x: remove unnecessary postcore_initcall()
@ 2018-04-04 12:57 Sekhar Nori
  2018-04-04 15:52 ` David Lechner
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Sekhar Nori @ 2018-04-04 12:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: linux-arm-kernel

dm644x_init_devices() is unnecessarily implemented as a
postcore_initcall().

This does not cause any issues now, but creates issues when
converting to common clock framework where clocks themselves
become platform devices and are initialized later. Because of
this, device clock acquisition and runtime PM on that device
fails.

Move the call to .init_machine() callback along with rest of
platform device's registration.

Signed-off-by: Sekhar Nori <nsekhar@ti.com>
---
 arch/arm/mach-davinci/board-dm644x-evm.c  | 5 +++++
 arch/arm/mach-davinci/board-neuros-osd2.c | 5 +++++
 arch/arm/mach-davinci/board-sffsdr.c      | 6 ++++++
 arch/arm/mach-davinci/davinci.h           | 1 +
 arch/arm/mach-davinci/dm644x.c            | 6 +-----
 5 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-davinci/board-dm644x-evm.c b/arch/arm/mach-davinci/board-dm644x-evm.c
index 95b55aae1366..d1a7239a80d6 100644
--- a/arch/arm/mach-davinci/board-dm644x-evm.c
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-davinci/board-dm644x-evm.c
@@ -768,6 +768,11 @@ static __init void davinci_evm_init(void)
 	struct clk *aemif_clk;
 	struct davinci_soc_info *soc_info = &davinci_soc_info;
 
+	ret = dm644x_init_devices();
+	if (ret)
+		pr_warn("%s: dm644x_init_devices() failed: %d\n",
+			__func__, ret);
+
 	ret = dm644x_gpio_register();
 	if (ret)
 		pr_warn("%s: GPIO init failed: %d\n", __func__, ret);
diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-davinci/board-neuros-osd2.c b/arch/arm/mach-davinci/board-neuros-osd2.c
index f2875770fbff..23f4f0b70752 100644
--- a/arch/arm/mach-davinci/board-neuros-osd2.c
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-davinci/board-neuros-osd2.c
@@ -174,6 +174,11 @@ static __init void davinci_ntosd2_init(void)
 	struct clk *aemif_clk;
 	struct davinci_soc_info *soc_info = &davinci_soc_info;
 
+	ret = dm644x_init_devices();
+	if (ret)
+		pr_warn("%s: dm644x_init_devices() failed: %d\n",
+			__func__, ret);
+
 	ret = dm644x_gpio_register();
 	if (ret)
 		pr_warn("%s: GPIO init failed: %d\n", __func__, ret);
diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-davinci/board-sffsdr.c b/arch/arm/mach-davinci/board-sffsdr.c
index 2922da9d1684..d9900d7c26d3 100644
--- a/arch/arm/mach-davinci/board-sffsdr.c
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-davinci/board-sffsdr.c
@@ -133,6 +133,12 @@ static void __init davinci_sffsdr_map_io(void)
 static __init void davinci_sffsdr_init(void)
 {
 	struct davinci_soc_info *soc_info = &davinci_soc_info;
+	int ret;
+
+	ret = dm644x_init_devices();
+	if (ret)
+		pr_warn("%s: dm644x_init_devices() failed: %d\n",
+			__func__, ret);
 
 	platform_add_devices(davinci_sffsdr_devices,
 			     ARRAY_SIZE(davinci_sffsdr_devices));
diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-davinci/davinci.h b/arch/arm/mach-davinci/davinci.h
index 270cef85750a..0ba37d68ecb4 100644
--- a/arch/arm/mach-davinci/davinci.h
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-davinci/davinci.h
@@ -104,6 +104,7 @@ int dm365_gpio_register(void);
 
 /* DM644x function declarations */
 void dm644x_init(void);
+int dm644x_init_devices(void);
 void dm644x_init_time(void);
 void dm644x_init_asp(void);
 int dm644x_init_video(struct vpfe_config *, struct vpbe_config *);
diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-davinci/dm644x.c b/arch/arm/mach-davinci/dm644x.c
index b409801649e1..da833290291b 100644
--- a/arch/arm/mach-davinci/dm644x.c
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-davinci/dm644x.c
@@ -961,14 +961,11 @@ int __init dm644x_init_video(struct vpfe_config *vpfe_cfg,
 	return 0;
 }
 
-static int __init dm644x_init_devices(void)
+int __init dm644x_init_devices(void)
 {
 	struct platform_device *edma_pdev;
 	int ret = 0;
 
-	if (!cpu_is_davinci_dm644x())
-		return 0;
-
 	edma_pdev = platform_device_register_full(&dm644x_edma_device);
 	if (IS_ERR(edma_pdev)) {
 		pr_warn("%s: Failed to register eDMA\n", __func__);
@@ -984,4 +981,3 @@ static int __init dm644x_init_devices(void)
 
 	return ret;
 }
-postcore_initcall(dm644x_init_devices);
-- 
2.16.2

^ permalink raw reply related	[flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* [PATCH] ARM: davinci: dm644x: remove unnecessary postcore_initcall()
  2018-04-04 12:57 [PATCH] ARM: davinci: dm644x: remove unnecessary postcore_initcall() Sekhar Nori
@ 2018-04-04 15:52 ` David Lechner
  2018-04-05  6:10   ` Sekhar Nori
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: David Lechner @ 2018-04-04 15:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: linux-arm-kernel

On 04/04/2018 07:57 AM, Sekhar Nori wrote:
> dm644x_init_devices() is unnecessarily implemented as a
> postcore_initcall().
> 
> This does not cause any issues now, but creates issues when
> converting to common clock framework where clocks themselves
> become platform devices and are initialized later. Because of
> this, device clock acquisition and runtime PM on that device
> fails.
> 
> Move the call to .init_machine() callback along with rest of
> platform device's registration.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Sekhar Nori <nsekhar@ti.com>
> ---
>   arch/arm/mach-davinci/board-dm644x-evm.c  | 5 +++++
>   arch/arm/mach-davinci/board-neuros-osd2.c | 5 +++++
>   arch/arm/mach-davinci/board-sffsdr.c      | 6 ++++++
>   arch/arm/mach-davinci/davinci.h           | 1 +
>   arch/arm/mach-davinci/dm644x.c            | 6 +-----
>   5 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-davinci/board-dm644x-evm.c b/arch/arm/mach-davinci/board-dm644x-evm.c
> index 95b55aae1366..d1a7239a80d6 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/mach-davinci/board-dm644x-evm.c
> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-davinci/board-dm644x-evm.c
> @@ -768,6 +768,11 @@ static __init void davinci_evm_init(void)
>   	struct clk *aemif_clk;
>   	struct davinci_soc_info *soc_info = &davinci_soc_info;
>   
> +	ret = dm644x_init_devices();
> +	if (ret)
> +		pr_warn("%s: dm644x_init_devices() failed: %d\n",
> +			__func__, ret);
> +
>   	ret = dm644x_gpio_register();
>   	if (ret)
>   		pr_warn("%s: GPIO init failed: %d\n", __func__, ret);
> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-davinci/board-neuros-osd2.c b/arch/arm/mach-davinci/board-neuros-osd2.c
> index f2875770fbff..23f4f0b70752 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/mach-davinci/board-neuros-osd2.c
> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-davinci/board-neuros-osd2.c
> @@ -174,6 +174,11 @@ static __init void davinci_ntosd2_init(void)
>   	struct clk *aemif_clk;
>   	struct davinci_soc_info *soc_info = &davinci_soc_info;
>   
> +	ret = dm644x_init_devices();
> +	if (ret)
> +		pr_warn("%s: dm644x_init_devices() failed: %d\n",
> +			__func__, ret);
> +
>   	ret = dm644x_gpio_register();
>   	if (ret)
>   		pr_warn("%s: GPIO init failed: %d\n", __func__, ret);
> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-davinci/board-sffsdr.c b/arch/arm/mach-davinci/board-sffsdr.c
> index 2922da9d1684..d9900d7c26d3 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/mach-davinci/board-sffsdr.c
> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-davinci/board-sffsdr.c
> @@ -133,6 +133,12 @@ static void __init davinci_sffsdr_map_io(void)
>   static __init void davinci_sffsdr_init(void)
>   {
>   	struct davinci_soc_info *soc_info = &davinci_soc_info;
> +	int ret;
> +
> +	ret = dm644x_init_devices();
> +	if (ret)
> +		pr_warn("%s: dm644x_init_devices() failed: %d\n",
> +			__func__, ret);

dm644x_init_devices() already prints a warning in all failure cases, so
printing another warning seems a bit redundant. It is probably OK to just
ignore the return value here and in the similar uses above.

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* [PATCH] ARM: davinci: dm644x: remove unnecessary postcore_initcall()
  2018-04-04 15:52 ` David Lechner
@ 2018-04-05  6:10   ` Sekhar Nori
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Sekhar Nori @ 2018-04-05  6:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: linux-arm-kernel

On Wednesday 04 April 2018 09:22 PM, David Lechner wrote:
>>
>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-davinci/board-sffsdr.c
>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-davinci/board-sffsdr.c
>> @@ -133,6 +133,12 @@ static void __init davinci_sffsdr_map_io(void)
>> ? static __init void davinci_sffsdr_init(void)
>> ? {
>> ????? struct davinci_soc_info *soc_info = &davinci_soc_info;
>> +??? int ret;
>> +
>> +??? ret = dm644x_init_devices();
>> +??? if (ret)
>> +??????? pr_warn("%s: dm644x_init_devices() failed: %d\n",
>> +??????????? __func__, ret);
> 
> dm644x_init_devices() already prints a warning in all failure cases, so
> printing another warning seems a bit redundant. It is probably OK to just
> ignore the return value here and in the similar uses above.

Alright, will fix and send v2.

Regards,
Sekhar

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2018-04-05  6:10 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2018-04-04 12:57 [PATCH] ARM: davinci: dm644x: remove unnecessary postcore_initcall() Sekhar Nori
2018-04-04 15:52 ` David Lechner
2018-04-05  6:10   ` Sekhar Nori

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.