On 02/12/15 18:03, Florian Fainelli wrote:
> 2015-11-30 12:58 GMT-08:00 Simon Arlott <simon@xxxxxxxxxxx>:
>> The BCM63xx contains a soft-reset controller activated by setting
>> a bit (that must previously have cleared).
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Simon Arlott <simon@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> MAINTAINERS | 1 +
>> drivers/reset/Kconfig | 9 +++
>> drivers/reset/Makefile | 1 +
>> drivers/reset/reset-bcm63xx.c | 134 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> 4 files changed, 145 insertions(+)
>> create mode 100644 drivers/reset/reset-bcm63xx.c
>
>
> Could you create a bcm directory and then add your reset-bcm63xx.c
> file there? I have a pending submission for the BCM63138 reset
> controller which is not at all using the same structure and will share
> nothing with your driver.
>
Ok, I'll call it reset-bcm6345.c to avoid confusion.
>
>> +static int bcm63xx_reset_xlate(struct reset_controller_dev *rcdev,
>> + const struct of_phandle_args *reset_spec)
>> +{
>> + struct bcm63xx_reset_priv *priv = to_bcm63xx_reset_priv(rcdev);
>> +
>> + if (WARN_ON(reset_spec->args_count != rcdev->of_reset_n_cells))
>> + return -EINVAL;
>> +
>> + if (reset_spec->args[0] >= rcdev->nr_resets)
>> + return -EINVAL;
>
> Should not these two things be moved to the core reset controller code
> based on the #reset-cells value?
>
This has already been removed from the next version of the patch.
>
>> + if (of_property_read_u32(np, "offset", &priv->offset))
>> + return -EINVAL;
>> +
>> + /* valid reset bits */
>> + if (of_property_read_u32(np, "mask", &priv->mask))
>> + priv->mask = 0xffffffff;
>> +
>> + priv->rcdev.owner = THIS_MODULE;
>> + priv->rcdev.ops = &bcm63xx_reset_ops;
>> + priv->rcdev.nr_resets = 32;
>
> Should not that come from Device Tree, or be computed based on the
> mask property, like hweight_long() or something along these lines?
The "mask" property has been removed. It will assume 32 resets and rely
on the rest of the DT to only refer to valid bits.
--
Simon Arlott
