On 09/22/2017 05:47 AM, Charles Keepax wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 06:04:20PM -0700, Florian Fainelli wrote:
>> It may happen that a device needs to force applying a state, e.g:
>> because it only defines one state of pin states (default) but loses
>> power/register contents when entering low power modes. Add a
>> pinctrl_dev::flags bitmask to help describe future quirks and define
>> PINCTRL_FLG_FORCE_STATE as such a settable flag.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@xxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> drivers/pinctrl/core.c | 15 +++++++++++++++
>> drivers/pinctrl/core.h | 4 ++++
>> 2 files changed, 19 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/core.c b/drivers/pinctrl/core.c
>> index 56fbe4c3e800..c450a97de88f 100644
>> --- a/drivers/pinctrl/core.c
>> +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/core.c
>> @@ -1197,11 +1197,26 @@ int pinctrl_select_state(struct pinctrl *p, struct pinctrl_state *state)
>> {
>> struct pinctrl_setting *setting, *setting2;
>> struct pinctrl_state *old_state = p->state;
>> + bool force = false;
>> int ret;
>>
>> if (p->state == state)
>> return 0;
>
> I am guessing you probably intended to remove these two lines.
Argh right, I cherry-picked what I done on an earlier kernel version and
this resolved to this, thanks for noticing!
>
>>
>> + if (p->state) {
>> + list_for_each_entry(setting, &p->state->settings, node) {
>> + if (setting->pctldev->flags & PINCTRL_FLG_FORCE_STATE)
>> + force = true;
>> + }
>> + }
>> +
>> + /* Some controllers may want to force this operation when they define
>> + * only one set of functions and lose power state, e.g: pinctrl-single
>> + * with its pinctrl-single,low-power-state-loss property.
>> + */
>> + if (p->state == state && !force)
>> + return 0;
>> +
>
> Thanks,
> Charles
>
--
Florian
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
