Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] Bluetooth: hci_qca: Add qca_power_on() API to support both wcn399x and Rome power up

[Rocky Liao <rjliao@codeaurora.org>]

在 2020-01-09 11:22，Rocky Liao 写道：
> Hi Matt,
> 
> 在 2020-01-09 02:34，Matthias Kaehlcke 写道：
>> Hi Rocky,
>> 
>> On Wed, Jan 08, 2020 at 05:08:02PM +0800, Rocky Liao wrote:
>>> This patch adds a unified API qca_power_on() to support both wcn399x 
>>> and
>>> Rome power on. For wcn399x it calls the qca_wcn3990_init() to init 
>>> the
>>> regulators, and for Rome it pulls up the bt_en GPIO to power up the 
>>> btsoc.
>>> 
>>> Signed-off-by: Rocky Liao <rjliao@codeaurora.org>
>>> ---
>>> 
>>> Changes in v2: None
>>> 
>>>  drivers/bluetooth/hci_qca.c | 21 +++++++++++++++++++++
>>>  1 file changed, 21 insertions(+)
>>> 
>>> diff --git a/drivers/bluetooth/hci_qca.c 
>>> b/drivers/bluetooth/hci_qca.c
>>> index 9392cc7f9908..f6555bd1adbc 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/bluetooth/hci_qca.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/bluetooth/hci_qca.c
>>> @@ -1532,6 +1532,27 @@ static int qca_wcn3990_init(struct hci_uart 
>>> *hu)
>>>  	return 0;
>>>  }
>>> 
>>> +static int qca_power_on(struct hci_dev *hdev)
>>> +{
>>> +	struct hci_uart *hu = hci_get_drvdata(hdev);
>>> +	enum qca_btsoc_type soc_type = qca_soc_type(hu);
>>> +	struct qca_serdev *qcadev;
>>> +	int ret = 0;
>>> +
>>> +	if (qca_is_wcn399x(soc_type)) {
>> 
>> Why not include the qca_regulator_enable() call from qca_open() here?
>> It is clearly part of power on.
>> 
> OK
> 
qca_wcn3990_init() already have the qca_regulator_enable() call, so we 
just
need to remove it from qca_open().

>>> +		ret = qca_wcn3990_init(hu);
>>> +	} else {
>>> +		if (hu->serdev) {
>> 
>> nit: you could save a level of indentation (and IMO improve
>> readability) by doing:
>> 
>>      	       if (!hu->serdev)
>> 	            	return 0;
>> 
> OK
> 
>>> +			qcadev = serdev_device_get_drvdata(hu->serdev);
>>> +			gpiod_set_value_cansleep(qcadev->bt_en, 1);
>>> +			/* Controller needs time to bootup. */
>>> +			msleep(150);
>>> +		}
>>> +	}
>>> +
>>> +	return ret;
>>> +}
>>> +
>> 
>> I think common practice would be to combine the 3 patches of this 
>> series
>> into one. The new function doesn't really add any new functionality, 
>> but
>> is a refactoring. This is more evident if you see in a single diff 
>> that
>> the pieces in qca_power_on() are removed elsewhere.
> OK