On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 06:29:35PM -0700, Stephen Boyd wrote: > On 04/25, Andy Gross wrote: > > This patch converts the Qualcomm SCM firmware driver into a platform > > driver. > > > > Signed-off-by: Andy Gross <andy.gross@xxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms | 1 + > > drivers/firmware/qcom_scm.c | 163 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--- > > 2 files changed, 155 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms b/arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms > > index efa77c1..6f0876f 100644 > > --- a/arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms > > +++ b/arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms > > @@ -76,6 +76,7 @@ config ARCH_MVEBU > > config ARCH_QCOM > > bool "Qualcomm Platforms" > > select PINCTRL > > + select QCOM_SCM > > So far we've left this selection up to the consumer drivers of > the qcom_scm_*() APIs. Any reason why that's changing here? I > don't see mention in the commit text. We can leave it that way. > > > help > > This enables support for the ARMv8 based Qualcomm chipsets. > > > > + > > +/** > > + * qcom_scm_is_available() - Checks if SCM is available > > + */ > > +bool qcom_scm_is_available(void) > > +{ > > + return !!__scm; > > +} > > +EXPORT_SYMBOL(qcom_scm_is_available); > > What's the planned user of this? If we need it can we bury it > inside the qcom_scm_*() functions? Hmmmm doing a little searching, I don't see this being used anymore. I'll drop it for now. > > + > > +static int qcom_scm_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > > +{ > [...] > > + > > + /* vote for max clk rate for highest performance */ > > + rate = clk_round_rate(scm->core_clk, INT_MAX); > > + ret = clk_set_rate(scm->core_clk, rate); > > You can just do clk_set_rate(scm->core_clk, INT_MAX) and it will > round internally for you and do the right thing. I'll change this to do that. > > + if (ret) > > + return ret; > > + > > + __scm = scm; > > + __scm->dev = &pdev->dev; > > + > > + return 0; > > +} > > + > > +static const struct of_device_id qcom_scm_dt_match[] = { > > + { .compatible = "qcom,scm-apq8064",}, > > + { .compatible = "qcom,scm-apq8084",}, > > + { .compatible = "qcom,scm-msm8916",}, > > + { .compatible = "qcom,scm-msm8974",}, > > + {}, > > Nitpick: drop , here because it's always going to be the last > entry. will fix. > > +}; > > + > > +MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, qcom_scm_dt_match); > > + > > +static struct platform_driver qcom_scm_driver = { > > + .driver = { > > + .name = "qcom_scm", > > + .of_match_table = qcom_scm_dt_match, > > + }, > > + .probe = qcom_scm_probe, > > +}; > > + > > +builtin_platform_driver(qcom_scm_driver); > > + > > +static int __init qcom_scm_init(void) > > +{ > > + struct device_node *np; > > + > > + np = of_find_node_by_name(NULL, "firmware"); > > + if (!np) > > + return -ENODEV; > > + > > + return of_platform_populate(np, qcom_scm_dt_match, NULL, NULL); > > + > > Weird newline and also we need an of_node_put() on the firmware > node at the end of this function. Ah thanks for catching that. Regards, Andy -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arm-msm" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html