On 08/28/2015 05:31 AM, Lee Jones wrote:
> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/Kconfig b/drivers/remoteproc/Kconfig
> index 28c711f..72e97d7 100644
> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/Kconfig
> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/Kconfig
> @@ -77,4 +77,13 @@ config DA8XX_REMOTEPROC
> It's safe to say n here if you're not interested in multimedia
> offloading.
>
> +config ST_REMOTEPROC
> + tristate "ST remoteproc support"
> + depends on ARCH_STI
> + select REMOTEPROC
> + help
> + Say y here to support ST's adjunct processors via the remote
> + processor framework.
> + This can be either built-in or a loadable module.
> +
The code uses reset_control_* APIs, so this should depend on
RESET_CONTROLLER, no?
> +/*
> + * ST's Remote Processor Control Driver
> + *
> + * Copyright (C) 2015 STMicroelectronics - All Rights Reserved
> + *
> + * Author: Ludovic Barre <ludovic.barre@xxxxxx>
> + *
> + * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
> + * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by
> + * the Free Software Foundation; either version 2, or (at your option)
> + * any later version.
> + */
OK, but:
> +MODULE_LICENSE("GPL v2");
These are not in agreement. You want "GPL" for MODULE_LICENSE if you
intend v2 or later.
> +static int st_rproc_stop(struct rproc *rproc)
> +{
> + struct st_rproc *st_rproc = rproc->priv;
> + int ret, err = 0;
> +
> + if (st_rproc->config->sw_reset) {
> + ret = reset_control_assert(st_rproc->sw_reset);
> + if (ret)
> + dev_err(&rproc->dev, "Failed to assert S/W Reset\n");
> + }
> +
> + if (st_rproc->config->pwr_reset) {
> + err = reset_control_assert(st_rproc->pwr_reset);
> + if (err)
> + dev_err(&rproc->dev, "Failed to assert Power Reset\n");
> + }
> +
> + clk_disable(st_rproc->clk);
> +
> + return ret ?: err;
> +}
Sorry, but I think this is a stylistically inadequate response to my
earlier comments. At least name the status variables sw_ret and pwr_ret
or something. And it looks like ret could be used uninitialized.
Also, do you want to unconditionally call clk_disable even if you've
encountered errors?
> +static int st_rproc_start(struct rproc *rproc)
> +{
> + struct st_rproc *st_rproc = rproc->priv;
> + int err;
> +
> + regmap_update_bits(st_rproc->boot_base, st_rproc->boot_offset,
> + st_rproc->config->bootaddr_mask, rproc->bootaddr);
> +
> + err = clk_enable(st_rproc->clk);
> + if (err) {
> + dev_err(&rproc->dev, "Failed to enable clock\n");
> + return err;
> + }
> +
> + if (st_rproc->config->sw_reset) {
> + err = reset_control_deassert(st_rproc->sw_reset);
> + if (err) {
> + dev_err(&rproc->dev, "Failed to deassert S/W Reset\n");
> + return err;
> + }
> + }
> +
> + if (st_rproc->config->pwr_reset) {
> + err = reset_control_deassert(st_rproc->pwr_reset);
> + if (err) {
> + dev_err(&rproc->dev, "Failed to deassert Power Reset\n");
> + return err;
> + }
> + }
> +
> + dev_info(&rproc->dev, "Started from 0x%x\n", rproc->bootaddr);
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
Does this want to unwind any of its operations if it encounters a failure?
--
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
