Le Mon, Jun 20, 2022 at 12:04:24PM +0100, John Keeping a écrit : > On Sun, May 08, 2022 at 06:59:38PM +0000, Corentin Labbe wrote: > > reset could be handled by PM functions. > > Is there any further rationale for this? > > After this change there is no longer a guaranteed reset pulse on probe > since the reset control may already be de-asserted. This is normally > the most important case for a reset as it's the only time when the state > of the hardware is unknown. > > The original use of devm_add_action_or_reset() seems a bit weird already > since there doesn't seem to be any need to assert reset when the driver > is unloaded. > I am not an hw engineer, so my knowledge on reset is low. So why not having a reset pulse on probe is a problem ? Do you mean I must put reset asserted on probe ?
