On Mon, 2014-07-07 at 04:45PM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 1:39 PM, Harini Katakam <harinik@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > From: Harini Katakam <harini.katakam@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > Add support for GPIO controller used by Xilinx Zynq.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Harini Katakam <harinik@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > Signed-off-by: Soren Brinkmann <soren.brinkmann@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >
> > v2 changes:
> > - convert to pm_runtime_force_(suspend|resume)
> > - add pm_runtime_set_active in probe()
> > - also (un)prepare clocks when they are dis-/enabled
> > - add some missing calls to pm_runtime_get()
> > - use pm_runtime_put() instead of sync variant
> > - remove gpio chip in driver remove()
> > - remove redundant type casts
> > - directly use IO helpers
> > - use BIT macro to set/clear bits
> > - migrate to GPIOLIB_IRQCHIP
>
> This is a great improvement! Only small stuff remains.
>
> > +#include <linux/bitops.h>
> > +#include <linux/clk.h>
> > +#include <linux/gpio.h>
>
> This should be:
> #include <linux/gpio/driver.h>
>
> If that doesn't work ... why?
Works just fine.
>
> > +/**
> > + * struct zynq_gpio - gpio device private data structure
> > + * @chip: instance of the gpio_chip
> > + * @base_addr: base address of the GPIO device
> > + * @irq: irq associated with the controller
> > + * @clk: clock resource for this controller
> > + */
> > +struct zynq_gpio {
> > + struct gpio_chip chip;
> > + void __iomem *base_addr;
> > + int irq;
>
> Why is irq kept around in this struct? It looks like it could just
> be a local variable in probe()?
You're right.
I think that were both part of the legacy in this driver.
Sören
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-doc" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
