2018-03-21 17:17 GMT+01:00 David Lechner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> On 03/21/2018 11:08 AM, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
>>
>> 2018-03-21 17:01 GMT+01:00 David Lechner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
>>>
>>> On 03/21/2018 07:08 AM, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> From: Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>
>>>> In order to be able to use the reset framework in legacy boot mode as
>>>> well, add the reset lookup table to the psc driver for da850 variant.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>> ---
>>>> drivers/clk/davinci/psc-da850.c | 8 ++++++++
>>>> drivers/clk/davinci/psc.c | 1 +
>>>> 2 files changed, 9 insertions(+)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/clk/davinci/psc-da850.c
>>>> b/drivers/clk/davinci/psc-da850.c
>>>> index ccc7eb17bf3a..395db4b2c0ee 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/clk/davinci/psc-da850.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/clk/davinci/psc-da850.c
>>>> @@ -6,6 +6,7 @@
>>>> */
>>>> #include <linux/clk-provider.h>
>>>> +#include <linux/reset-controller.h>
>>>> #include <linux/clk.h>
>>>> #include <linux/clkdev.h>
>>>> #include <linux/init.h>
>>>> @@ -66,8 +67,15 @@ LPSC_CLKDEV3(ecap_clkdev, "fck", "ecap.0",
>>>> "fck", "ecap.1",
>>>> "fck", "ecap.2");
>>>> +static struct reset_control_lookup da850_psc0_reset_lookup_table[] =
>>>> {
>>>> + RESET_LOOKUP("davinci-rproc.0", NULL, 15),
>>>> +};
>>>> +
>>>> static int da850_psc0_init(struct device *dev, void __iomem *base)
>>>> {
>>>> + reset_controller_add_lookup("da850-psc0",
>>>> + da850_psc0_reset_lookup_table,
>>>> +
>>>> ARRAY_SIZE(da850_psc0_reset_lookup_table));
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Could there be a race condition here since you are adding the lookup
>>> *before*
>>> you are adding the actual provider? It seems like
>>> reset_controller_add_lookup()
>>> should be after davinci_psc_register_clocks().
>>>
>>
>> I don't think so, because reset_controller_add_lookup() only adds the
>> lookup structure to the list in reset/core.c. The actual reset
>> controller struct is only located and used when reset_control_get_*()
>> is called, so after probing the user. And it's all protected with
>> mutexes.
>>
>> This made me think though - maybe if we can't locate the controller,
>> we should return -EPROBE_DEFER from probe in davinci-rproc?
>>
>> Bart
>>
>
> Yes, especially since we know that the PSC driver itself does get
> deferred already.
On the other hand if clk_get() succeeded, than the psc driver is
already initialized and the subsequent call to reset_control_get()
must succeed. But this is probably too machine-specific for a driver.
Bart
--
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
