"DebBarma, Tarun Kanti" <tarun.kanti@xxxxxx> writes: > On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 5:35 PM, DebBarma, Tarun Kanti > <tarun.kanti@xxxxxx> wrote: >> On Fri, Nov 4, 2011 at 10:23 PM, Kevin Hilman <khilman@xxxxxx> wrote: >>> Tarun Kanti DebBarma <tarun.kanti@xxxxxx> writes: >>> >>>> From: Nishanth Menon <nm@xxxxxx> >>>> >>>> GPIO IP revisions such as those used in OMAP4 have a set_dataout >>>> while the previous revisions used a single dataout register. >>>> Depending on what is available restore the dataout settings >>>> to the right register. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Nishanth Menon <nm@xxxxxx> >>>> Signed-off-by: Tarun Kanti DebBarma <tarun.kanti@xxxxxx> >>>> Reviewed-by: Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@xxxxxx> >>>> --- >>>> drivers/gpio/gpio-omap.c | 9 +++++++-- >>>> 1 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpio-omap.c b/drivers/gpio/gpio-omap.c >>>> index 4009446..3df7a98 100644 >>>> --- a/drivers/gpio/gpio-omap.c >>>> +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpio-omap.c >>>> @@ -1073,7 +1073,7 @@ static int __devinit omap_gpio_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) >>>> bank->get_context_loss_count = pdata->get_context_loss_count; >>>> bank->regs = pdata->regs; >>>> >>>> - if (bank->regs->set_dataout && bank->regs->clr_dataout) >>>> + if (bank->regs->set_dataout) >>> >>> This change isn't right. >>> >>> The _set_gpio_dataout_reg function depends on the existence of >>> ->clr_dataout too. >> Ok, I will add the clr_dataout condtion as well. > >> >>> >>>> bank->set_dataout = _set_gpio_dataout_reg; >>>> else >>>> bank->set_dataout = _set_gpio_dataout_mask; >>>> @@ -1351,7 +1351,12 @@ static void omap_gpio_restore_context(struct gpio_bank *bank) >>>> bank->base + bank->regs->risingdetect); >>>> __raw_writel(bank->context.fallingdetect, >>>> bank->base + bank->regs->fallingdetect); >>>> - __raw_writel(bank->context.dataout, bank->base + bank->regs->dataout); >>>> + if (bank->regs->set_dataout) >>> >>> Why the check again? The check has already been done in probe. >>> >>> Just use bank->set_dataout() here. >> Sure, i will make the change. > > When I look at the signature of set_dataout(), it does not seem > straight forward to be used here. It expects (struct gpio_bank *bank, > int gpio, int enable) to be passed to it. IOW, it expects to only set 1 bit, where the context restore needs to set the value for the whole register. OK, then keep the original version, but make sure the if statement matches is checking for ->set_dataout and ->clr_dataout like the other one. Kevin -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
