Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 10 Sep 2014 16:12:53 +0800 | From | Shengjiu Wang <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH V1] ASoC: fsl_ssi: refine ipg clock usage in this module |
| |
On Tue, Sep 09, 2014 at 11:38:05AM -0700, Nicolin Chen wrote: > On Tue, Sep 09, 2014 at 05:18:07PM +0800, Shengjiu Wang wrote: > > @@ -1321,7 +1333,11 @@ static int fsl_ssi_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > > return -ENOMEM; > > } > > > > - ssi_private->regs = devm_regmap_init_mmio(&pdev->dev, iomem, > > + if (ssi_private->soc->imx) > > + ssi_private->regs = devm_regmap_init_mmio_clk(&pdev->dev, > > + "ipg", iomem, &fsl_ssi_regconfig); > > + else > > + ssi_private->regs = devm_regmap_init_mmio(&pdev->dev, iomem, > > As Markus mentioned, the key point here is to be compatible with those > non-clock-name platforms. > > I think it would be safer to keep the current code while adding an extra > clk_disable_unprepare() at the end of probe() as a common routine. And > meantime, make sure to have the call for imx only because it seems that > the other platforms do not depend on the clock. //a bit guessing here :) > > Then we can get a patch like: > open() { > + clk_prepare_enable(); > .... > } > > close() { > .... > + clk_disable_unprepare() > } what is the open() and close()? do you mean the fsl_ssi_startup() and fsl_ssi_shutdown()? > > probe() { > clk_get(); > clk_prepare_enable(); > .... > if (xxx) > - goto err_xx; > + return ret; > .... > + clk_disable_unprepare(); > return 0; > -err_xx: > - clk_disable_unprepare() > } If this probe() is fsl_ssi_imx_probe(), I think no need to add clk_prepare_enable() or clk_disable_unprepare(), seems there is no registers accessing in this probe. > > remove() { > .... > - clk_disable_unprepare() > } > > As long as you make the subject clear as 'Don't enable core/ipg clock > when SSI's idle', I'm sure you can make them within a single patch. > > And an alternative way for open() and close() is to put those code into > pm_runtime_resume/suspend() instead (since we might have some internal > code need to be added by using pm_runtime as well), which would make > the further code neater IMO. > > Thank you > Nicolin
| |