On Tue, 2018-04-17 at 19:30 +0200, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> From: Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> Switch to using the reset framework instead of handcoded reset routines
> we used so far.
>
> Signed-off-by: Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
[...]
> @@ -268,6 +282,15 @@ static int da8xx_rproc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> return PTR_ERR(dsp_clk);
> }
>
> + dsp_reset = devm_reset_control_get_exclusive(dev, NULL);
> + if (IS_ERR(dsp_reset)) {
> + if (PTR_ERR(dsp_reset) != -EPROBE_DEFER)
> + dev_err(dev, "unable to get reset control: %ld\n",
> + PTR_ERR(dsp_reset));
> +
> + return PTR_ERR(dsp_reset);
> + }
> +
> if (dev->of_node) {
> ret = of_reserved_mem_device_init(dev);
> if (ret) {
[...]
> @@ -309,7 +333,7 @@ static int da8xx_rproc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> * *not* in reset, but da8xx_rproc_start() needs the DSP to be
> * held in reset at the time it is called.
Given this requirement, devm_reset_control_get_exclusive above is the
correct choice.
> */
> - ret = davinci_clk_reset_assert(drproc->dsp_clk);
> + ret = reset_control_assert(dsp_reset);
Reviewed-by: Philipp Zabel <p.zabel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
regards
Philipp
--
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
