| Message ID | 1490005679.2917.32.camel@pengutronix.de (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Not Applicable |
| Headers | show |
On 20.03.2017 11:27, Philipp Zabel wrote: > Hi Andrzej, > > On Mon, 2017-03-20 at 11:03 +0100, Andrzej Hajda wrote: >> Hi Philipp, >> >> On 20.03.2017 10:53, Philipp Zabel wrote: >>> On Mon, 2017-03-20 at 10:22 +0100, Andrzej Hajda wrote: >>>> Hi Philipp, >>>> >>>> Todays next branch does not work with exynos5433-tm2 board. >>>> I guess this patch causes regression. On MMC without reset controller I >>>> get errors: >>>> [ 4.938222] dwmmc_exynos 15540000.mshc: platform data not available >>>> [ 4.943268] dwmmc_exynos: probe of 15540000.mshc failed with error -22 > I was thrown off by this. Should maybe dw_mci_probe return the error > value reported by dw_mci_parse_dt instead of always returning -EINVAL? > >>>> [ 4.950184] dwmmc_exynos 15560000.mshc: platform data not available >>>> [ 4.955962] dwmmc_exynos: probe of 15560000.mshc failed with error -22 >>>> >>>> Commenting out reset controller get and error checks 'fixes' the issue. >>>> >>>> On 15.03.2017 12:31, Philipp Zabel wrote: >>>>> As of commit bb475230b8e5 ("reset: make optional functions really >>>>> optional"), the reset framework API calls use NULL pointers to describe >>>>> optional, non-present reset controls. >>>>> >>>>> This allows to return errors from devm_reset_control_get_optional and to >>>>> call reset_control_(de)assert unconditionally. >>>>> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Philipp Zabel <p.zabel@pengutronix.de> >>>>> --- >>>>> drivers/mmc/host/dw_mmc.c | 14 +++++--------- >>>>> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) >>>>> >>>>> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/dw_mmc.c b/drivers/mmc/host/dw_mmc.c >>>>> index a9ac0b4573131..3d62b0a1f81cb 100644 >>>>> --- a/drivers/mmc/host/dw_mmc.c >>>>> +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/dw_mmc.c >>>>> @@ -2968,10 +2968,8 @@ static struct dw_mci_board *dw_mci_parse_dt(struct dw_mci *host) >>>>> >>>>> /* find reset controller when exist */ >>>>> pdata->rstc = devm_reset_control_get_optional(dev, "reset"); >>>>> - if (IS_ERR(pdata->rstc)) { >>>>> - if (PTR_ERR(pdata->rstc) == -EPROBE_DEFER) >>>>> - return ERR_PTR(-EPROBE_DEFER); >>>>> - } >>>>> + if (IS_ERR(pdata->rstc)) >>>>> + return ERR_CAST(pdata->rstc); >>>> With three lines above commented out it works. >>> So devm_reset_control_get_optional returns -EINVAL. Why? >>> >>> The mshc@15560000 node is compatible to "samsung,exynos7-dw-mshc-smu", >>> so that's dw_mmc-exynos.c calling dw_mci_pltfm_register, which then >>> calls dw_mci_probe, passing the original platform device as >>> host->dev = &pdev->dev, and I expect __of_reset_control_get being called >>> with a valid DT node (dev->of_node). >>> Since id is set to "reset", of_property_match_string(node, >>> "reset-names", id) should then be called and return -EINVAL because the >>> "reset-names" property does not exist. Then __of_reset_control_get >>> should return NULL because optional == true. >>> Some of this obviously doesn't happen, where am I wrong? >> >> When RESET_CONTROLLER is not enabled dummy stubs return -ENOSUPP error [1]. >> >> [1]: http://lxr.free-electrons.com/source/include/linux/reset.h#L77 > Thanks, I suppose that issue should be fixed by: > > ----------8<---------- > diff --git a/include/linux/reset.h b/include/linux/reset.h > index 86b4ed75359e8..c905ff1c21ec6 100644 > --- a/include/linux/reset.h > +++ b/include/linux/reset.h > @@ -74,14 +74,14 @@ static inline struct reset_control *__of_reset_control_get( > const char *id, int index, bool shared, > bool optional) > { > - return ERR_PTR(-ENOTSUPP); > + return optional ? NULL : ERR_PTR(-ENOTSUPP); > } > > static inline struct reset_control *__devm_reset_control_get( > struct device *dev, const char *id, > int index, bool shared, bool optional) > { > - return ERR_PTR(-ENOTSUPP); > + return optional ? NULL : ERR_PTR(-ENOTSUPP); > } > > #endif /* CONFIG_RESET_CONTROLLER */ > ---------->8---------- In dw_mmc.c file there are also unconditional calls to reset_control_assert, with disabled RESET_CONTROLLER it will cause unexpected WARNs. Anyway if you change reset API as above I think you should remove all warns from reset stubs, because NULL reset is valid, but these warns are there for reason - contradiction. Regards Andrzej > > regards > Philipp > > > > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On Mon, 2017-03-20 at 11:49 +0100, Andrzej Hajda wrote: > On 20.03.2017 11:27, Philipp Zabel wrote: [...] > > diff --git a/include/linux/reset.h b/include/linux/reset.h > > index 86b4ed75359e8..c905ff1c21ec6 100644 > > --- a/include/linux/reset.h > > +++ b/include/linux/reset.h > > @@ -74,14 +74,14 @@ static inline struct reset_control *__of_reset_control_get( > > const char *id, int index, bool shared, > > bool optional) > > { > > - return ERR_PTR(-ENOTSUPP); > > + return optional ? NULL : ERR_PTR(-ENOTSUPP); > > } > > > > static inline struct reset_control *__devm_reset_control_get( > > struct device *dev, const char *id, > > int index, bool shared, bool optional) > > { > > - return ERR_PTR(-ENOTSUPP); > > + return optional ? NULL : ERR_PTR(-ENOTSUPP); > > } > > > > #endif /* CONFIG_RESET_CONTROLLER */ > > ---------->8---------- > > In dw_mmc.c file there are also unconditional calls to > reset_control_assert, with disabled RESET_CONTROLLER it will cause > unexpected WARNs. > Anyway if you change reset API as above I think you should remove all > warns from reset stubs, because NULL reset is valid, but these warns are > there for reason - contradiction. You are right, I have to let go of those, too. regards Philipp -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On 20 March 2017 at 12:00, Philipp Zabel <p.zabel@pengutronix.de> wrote: > On Mon, 2017-03-20 at 11:49 +0100, Andrzej Hajda wrote: >> On 20.03.2017 11:27, Philipp Zabel wrote: > [...] >> > diff --git a/include/linux/reset.h b/include/linux/reset.h >> > index 86b4ed75359e8..c905ff1c21ec6 100644 >> > --- a/include/linux/reset.h >> > +++ b/include/linux/reset.h >> > @@ -74,14 +74,14 @@ static inline struct reset_control *__of_reset_control_get( >> > const char *id, int index, bool shared, >> > bool optional) >> > { >> > - return ERR_PTR(-ENOTSUPP); >> > + return optional ? NULL : ERR_PTR(-ENOTSUPP); >> > } >> > >> > static inline struct reset_control *__devm_reset_control_get( >> > struct device *dev, const char *id, >> > int index, bool shared, bool optional) >> > { >> > - return ERR_PTR(-ENOTSUPP); >> > + return optional ? NULL : ERR_PTR(-ENOTSUPP); >> > } >> > >> > #endif /* CONFIG_RESET_CONTROLLER */ >> > ---------->8---------- >> >> In dw_mmc.c file there are also unconditional calls to >> reset_control_assert, with disabled RESET_CONTROLLER it will cause >> unexpected WARNs. >> Anyway if you change reset API as above I think you should remove all >> warns from reset stubs, because NULL reset is valid, but these warns are >> there for reason - contradiction. > > You are right, I have to let go of those, too. > > regards > Philipp > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On 20 March 2017 at 12:00, Philipp Zabel <p.zabel@pengutronix.de> wrote: > On Mon, 2017-03-20 at 11:49 +0100, Andrzej Hajda wrote: >> On 20.03.2017 11:27, Philipp Zabel wrote: > [...] >> > diff --git a/include/linux/reset.h b/include/linux/reset.h >> > index 86b4ed75359e8..c905ff1c21ec6 100644 >> > --- a/include/linux/reset.h >> > +++ b/include/linux/reset.h >> > @@ -74,14 +74,14 @@ static inline struct reset_control *__of_reset_control_get( >> > const char *id, int index, bool shared, >> > bool optional) >> > { >> > - return ERR_PTR(-ENOTSUPP); >> > + return optional ? NULL : ERR_PTR(-ENOTSUPP); >> > } >> > >> > static inline struct reset_control *__devm_reset_control_get( >> > struct device *dev, const char *id, >> > int index, bool shared, bool optional) >> > { >> > - return ERR_PTR(-ENOTSUPP); >> > + return optional ? NULL : ERR_PTR(-ENOTSUPP); >> > } >> > >> > #endif /* CONFIG_RESET_CONTROLLER */ >> > ---------->8---------- >> >> In dw_mmc.c file there are also unconditional calls to >> reset_control_assert, with disabled RESET_CONTROLLER it will cause >> unexpected WARNs. >> Anyway if you change reset API as above I think you should remove all >> warns from reset stubs, because NULL reset is valid, but these warns are >> there for reason - contradiction. > > You are right, I have to let go of those, too. Until fixed, I have dropped the three changes from my next branch related to this. Please re-post when fixed. Kind regards Uffe > > regards > Philipp > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Hi All, On 03/21/2017 03:10 AM, Ulf Hansson wrote: > On 20 March 2017 at 12:00, Philipp Zabel <p.zabel@pengutronix.de> wrote: >> On Mon, 2017-03-20 at 11:49 +0100, Andrzej Hajda wrote: >>> On 20.03.2017 11:27, Philipp Zabel wrote: >> [...] >>>> diff --git a/include/linux/reset.h b/include/linux/reset.h >>>> index 86b4ed75359e8..c905ff1c21ec6 100644 >>>> --- a/include/linux/reset.h >>>> +++ b/include/linux/reset.h >>>> @@ -74,14 +74,14 @@ static inline struct reset_control *__of_reset_control_get( >>>> const char *id, int index, bool shared, >>>> bool optional) >>>> { >>>> - return ERR_PTR(-ENOTSUPP); >>>> + return optional ? NULL : ERR_PTR(-ENOTSUPP); >>>> } >>>> >>>> static inline struct reset_control *__devm_reset_control_get( >>>> struct device *dev, const char *id, >>>> int index, bool shared, bool optional) >>>> { >>>> - return ERR_PTR(-ENOTSUPP); >>>> + return optional ? NULL : ERR_PTR(-ENOTSUPP); >>>> } >>>> >>>> #endif /* CONFIG_RESET_CONTROLLER */ >>>> ---------->8---------- >>> >>> In dw_mmc.c file there are also unconditional calls to >>> reset_control_assert, with disabled RESET_CONTROLLER it will cause >>> unexpected WARNs. >>> Anyway if you change reset API as above I think you should remove all >>> warns from reset stubs, because NULL reset is valid, but these warns are >>> there for reason - contradiction. >> >> You are right, I have to let go of those, too. > > > Until fixed, I have dropped the three changes from my next branch > related to this. Please re-post when fixed. I missed this patch. If resend the patch, i will check. Best Regards, Jaehoon Chung > > Kind regards > Uffe > >> >> regards >> Philipp >> > > > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
diff --git a/include/linux/reset.h b/include/linux/reset.h index 86b4ed75359e8..c905ff1c21ec6 100644 --- a/include/linux/reset.h +++ b/include/linux/reset.h @@ -74,14 +74,14 @@ static inline struct reset_control *__of_reset_control_get( const char *id, int index, bool shared, bool optional) { - return ERR_PTR(-ENOTSUPP); + return optional ? NULL : ERR_PTR(-ENOTSUPP); } static inline struct reset_control *__devm_reset_control_get( struct device *dev, const char *id, int index, bool shared, bool optional) { - return ERR_PTR(-ENOTSUPP); + return optional ? NULL : ERR_PTR(-ENOTSUPP); } #endif /* CONFIG_RESET_CONTROLLER */