Hi Philippe,
On Thu, 2017-07-20 at 14:19 +0200, Philippe CORNU wrote:
> Based on patch "Convert drivers to explicit reset API" from Philipp Zabel
>
> Commit a53e35db70d1 ("reset: Ensure drivers are explicit when requesting
> reset lines") started to transition the reset control request API calls
> to explicitly state whether the driver needs exclusive or shared reset
> control behavior. Convert all drivers requesting exclusive resets to the
> explicit API call so the temporary transition helpers can be removed.
>
> No functional changes.
>
> Cc: Philipp Zabel <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: Philippe CORNU <[email protected]>
This reset control indeed has to be exclusive, as the driver depends on
the reset assertion to have an effect.
Acked-by: Philipp Zabel <[email protected]>
Again, the reset seems to be optional, though. I would suggest to change
this as follows:
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/synopsys/dw-mipi-dsi.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/synopsys/dw-mipi-dsi.c
> b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/synopsys/dw-mipi-dsi.c
> index 781340d..bb0bfa8 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/synopsys/dw-mipi-dsi.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/synopsys/dw-mipi-dsi.c
> @@ -885,7 +885,7 @@ static int dw_mipi_dsi_bridge_attach(struct drm_bridge
> *bridge)
> * Note that the reset was not defined in the initial device tree, so
> * we have to be prepared for it not being found.
> */
> - apb_rst = devm_reset_control_get(dev, "apb");
> + apb_rst = devm_reset_control_get_exclusive(dev, "apb");
> if (IS_ERR(apb_rst)) {
> ret = PTR_ERR(apb_rst);
> if (ret == -ENOENT) {
- apb_rst = devm_reset_control_get(dev, "apb");
+ apb_rst = devm_reset_control_get_optional_exclusive(dev, "apb");
if (IS_ERR(apb_rst)) {
ret = PTR_ERR(apb_rst);
- if (ret == -ENOENT) {
- apb_rst = NULL;
- } else {
- dev_err(dev, "Unable to get reset control: %d\n", ret);
- return ERR_PTR(ret);
- }
+ dev_err(dev, "Unable to get reset control: %d\n", ret);
+ return ERR_PTR(ret);
}
regards
Philipp
