Hi,
On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 1:19 AM, Taniya Das <tdas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> -static int gdsc_is_enabled(struct gdsc *sc, unsigned int reg)
> +static int gdsc_is_enabled(struct gdsc *sc, bool en)
> {
> + unsigned int reg;
> u32 val;
> int ret;
>
> + if (sc->flags & POLL_CFG_GDSCR)
> + reg = sc->gdscr + CFG_GDSCR_OFFSET;
> + else
> + reg = sc->gds_hw_ctrl ? sc->gds_hw_ctrl : sc->gdscr;
nit: why two spaces after the "?" in this new patch? Should be just one.
> diff --git a/drivers/clk/qcom/gdsc.h b/drivers/clk/qcom/gdsc.h
> index 3964834..ac5f844 100644
> --- a/drivers/clk/qcom/gdsc.h
> +++ b/drivers/clk/qcom/gdsc.h
> @@ -53,6 +53,7 @@ struct gdsc {
> #define VOTABLE BIT(0)
> #define CLAMP_IO BIT(1)
> #define HW_CTRL BIT(2)
> +#define POLL_CFG_GDSCR BIT(5)
This doesn't apply cleanly to clk-next because clk-next already has
the old patch #1 and patch #2 from your series. You should have
applied your patch to clk-next before sending out.
Also a nit here is that you have two spaces before "BIT(5)" but all
other entries in this list have a tab before them. You should be
consistent and use a tab.
In general I'd tend to assume that Stephen could handle this small
merge conflict and fixing the whitespace issues when applying, but if
he tells you to spin then you certainly should. I'll also say that
I'm nowhere near an expert on gdsc but it looks like Stephen's
previous comments were addressed and the patch seems sane in general.
Stephen: feel free to add my Reviewed-by: if you wish when applying
(or Taniya, if you end up spinning).
-Doug
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-soc" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
