Hi,
On Tue, Oct 2, 2018 at 2:48 PM Ryan Case <ryandcase@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> +#define RD_FIFO_STATUS 0x002c
> +#define FIFO_EMPTY BIT(11)
> +#define WR_CNTS_MSK 0x7f0
> +#define WR_CNTS_SHFT 4
> +#define RDY_64BYTE BIT(3)
> +#define RDY_32BYTE BIT(2)
> +#define RDY_16BYTE BIT(1)
> +#define FIFO_RDY BIT(0)
> +
> +#define RD_FIFO_CFG 0x0028
> +#define CONTINUOUS_MODE BIT(0)
You missed the above when re-sorting. The section for 0x0028 should
be above the section for 0x002c.
IMO there's been enough spins of this patch and it's a pretty minor
change. Mark: maybe you'd be OK with applying the current patch and
either fixing up the sort order as you apply or letting us know to
post a followup patch? ...or if you'd like a v7 then please yell.
> +static int __maybe_unused qcom_qspi_suspend(struct device *dev)
> +{
> + struct spi_master *master = dev_get_drvdata(dev);
> + int ret;
> +
> + ret = spi_master_suspend(master);
> + if (ret)
> + return ret;
> +
> + ret = pm_runtime_force_suspend(dev);
> + if (ret)
> + spi_master_resume(master);
> +
> + return ret;
> +}
> +
> +static int __maybe_unused qcom_qspi_resume(struct device *dev)
> +{
> + struct spi_master *master = dev_get_drvdata(dev);
> + int ret;
> +
> + ret = pm_runtime_force_resume(dev);
> + if (ret)
> + return ret;
> +
> + ret = spi_master_resume(master);
> + if (ret)
> + pm_runtime_force_suspend(dev);
> +
> + return ret;
> +}
As per my new understanding (now that I've been educated by Rafael)
[1] possibly the error handling here could be revamped to handle the
case where suspend() may be called again after a failed resume(). I'd
rather not block this patch based on that discussion though, so this
feels like something to address by a follow-up patch. Thus:
Reviewed-by: Douglas Anderson <dianders@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
[1] https://lkml.kernel.org/r/CAJZ5v0hSohUZvJcVcQzy_DdSyPVppOABk0HELsa3dpvf12LMPQ@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
