On Mi, 2024-02-14 at 22:20 +0100, Konrad Dybcio wrote: > On 14.02.2024 14:31, Philipp Zabel wrote: > > Hi Konrad, > > > > On Fr, 2024-02-09 at 22:10 +0100, Konrad Dybcio wrote: > > > All of the resets are toggled together. Use the bulk api to save on some > > > code complexity. > > > > > > The delay between resets is now correctly determined by the reset > > > framework. > > > > If this is a recent change, could you reference the commit? > > It's a series that recently landed in -next [1] Missing link? > [...] > > > > > Since VIDC_RESETS_NUM_MAX is only 2, I don't think a separate > > allocation is worth it. > > It's 2 today, anyway. I wanted to keep it flexible If this is expected to grow, fine. > [...] > > > > + ret = reset_control_bulk_reset(res->resets_num, core->resets); > > > + if (ret) > > > + dev_err(core->dev, "Failed to toggle resets: %d\n", ret); > > > > > > -err: > > > return ret; > > > > Could be simplified to: > > > > return reset_control_bulk_reset(res->resets_num, core- > > > resets); > > I intentionally kept the if (ret) to print a specific error message > in case the call fails, this driver doesn't go a good job of telling > the user/developer what went wrong. Oh, ok. regards Philipp
