Hi André, Thanks for the review! On Tue, 21 Jan 2025 at 11:20, André Draszik <andre.draszik@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hi Peter, > > On Mon, 2025-01-20 at 22:34 +0000, Peter Griffin wrote: > > gs101 needs it's own suspend/resume callbacks to use the newly > > added eint_fltcon_offset for saving & restoring fltcon0 & fltcon1 > > registers. It also differs to previous SoCs in that fltcon1 > > register doesn't always exist for each bank. > > > > exynosautov920 also has dedicated logic for using eint_con_offset > > and eint_mask_offset for saving & restoring it's registers. > > > > Refactor the existing platform specific suspend/resume callback > > so that each SoC variant has their own callback containing the > > SoC specific logic. > > > > Additionally we now call drvdata->suspend() & drvdata->resume() > > from within the loop that iterates the banks in > > samsung_pinctrl_suspend() and samsung_pinctrl_resume(). > > Maybe split this patch in two: > * first to do the refactoring plus adding exynosautov920_pinctrl_suspend() > and exynosautov920_pinctrl_resume() > * second to add gs101_pinctrl_suspend() / gs101_pinctrl_resume() > > This way, it's obvious which part is the bugfix and which part is the > preparation and I believe it'd be easier to read. Sure, I will split it into two patches in the next version. Thanks, Peter
