| Message ID | 20200527120111.5781-8-Sergey.Semin@baikalelectronics.ru (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Superseded |
| Headers | show |
| Series | i2c: designeware: Add Baikal-T1 System I2C support | expand |
On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 03:01:07PM +0300, Serge Semin wrote: > A PM workaround activated by the flag MODEL_CHERRYTRAIL has been removed > since commit 9cbeeca05049 ("i2c: designware: Remove Cherry Trail PMIC I2C > bus pm_disabled workaround"), but the flag most likely by mistake has been > left in the Dw I2C drivers. Let's remove it. ... > -#define MODEL_MSCC_OCELOT 0x00000200 > +#define MODEL_MSCC_OCELOT 0x00000100 But why? Does 0x200 work or not? I didn't see this in commit message.
On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 04:43:39PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 03:01:07PM +0300, Serge Semin wrote: > > A PM workaround activated by the flag MODEL_CHERRYTRAIL has been removed > > since commit 9cbeeca05049 ("i2c: designware: Remove Cherry Trail PMIC I2C > > bus pm_disabled workaround"), but the flag most likely by mistake has been > > left in the Dw I2C drivers. Let's remove it. > > ... > > > -#define MODEL_MSCC_OCELOT 0x00000200 > > +#define MODEL_MSCC_OCELOT 0x00000100 > > But why? > > Does 0x200 work or not? I didn't see this in commit message. I removed the MODEL_CHERRYTRAIL flag and redefined the only left MODEL_MSCC_OCELOT flag to set the very first bit allocated for the model flags. Isn't that obvious? -Sergey > > -- > With Best Regards, > Andy Shevchenko > >
On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 05:29:02PM +0300, Serge Semin wrote: > On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 04:43:39PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 03:01:07PM +0300, Serge Semin wrote: > > > A PM workaround activated by the flag MODEL_CHERRYTRAIL has been removed > > > since commit 9cbeeca05049 ("i2c: designware: Remove Cherry Trail PMIC I2C > > > bus pm_disabled workaround"), but the flag most likely by mistake has been > > > left in the Dw I2C drivers. Let's remove it. > > > > ... > > > > > -#define MODEL_MSCC_OCELOT 0x00000200 > > > +#define MODEL_MSCC_OCELOT 0x00000100 > > > > But why? > > > > Does 0x200 work or not? I didn't see this in commit message. > > I removed the MODEL_CHERRYTRAIL flag and redefined the only left > MODEL_MSCC_OCELOT flag to set the very first bit allocated for the model > flags. Isn't that obvious? Yes, but how it's related to the MSCC_OCELOT? Can't you simple put your define later to that number if absence of 0x100 provokes an exception when reading this code. Again, unneeded churn.
diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware-core.h b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware-core.h index 150de5e5c31b..b9ef9b0deef0 100644 --- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware-core.h +++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware-core.h @@ -289,8 +289,7 @@ struct dw_i2c_dev { #define ACCESS_INTR_MASK 0x00000004 #define ACCESS_NO_IRQ_SUSPEND 0x00000008 -#define MODEL_CHERRYTRAIL 0x00000100 -#define MODEL_MSCC_OCELOT 0x00000200 +#define MODEL_MSCC_OCELOT 0x00000100 #define MODEL_MASK 0x00000f00 u32 dw_readl(struct dw_i2c_dev *dev, int offset); diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware-pcidrv.c b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware-pcidrv.c index 11a5e4751eab..947c096f86e3 100644 --- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware-pcidrv.c +++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware-pcidrv.c @@ -149,7 +149,6 @@ static struct dw_pci_controller dw_pci_controllers[] = { }, [cherrytrail] = { .bus_num = -1, - .flags = MODEL_CHERRYTRAIL, .scl_sda_cfg = &byt_config, }, [elkhartlake] = { diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware-platdrv.c b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware-platdrv.c index f6d2c96e35ce..ca057aa9eac4 100644 --- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware-platdrv.c +++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware-platdrv.c @@ -44,7 +44,7 @@ static const struct acpi_device_id dw_i2c_acpi_match[] = { { "INT3432", 0 }, { "INT3433", 0 }, { "80860F41", ACCESS_NO_IRQ_SUSPEND }, - { "808622C1", ACCESS_NO_IRQ_SUSPEND | MODEL_CHERRYTRAIL }, + { "808622C1", ACCESS_NO_IRQ_SUSPEND }, { "AMD0010", ACCESS_INTR_MASK }, { "AMDI0010", ACCESS_INTR_MASK }, { "AMDI0510", 0 },
A PM workaround activated by the flag MODEL_CHERRYTRAIL has been removed since commit 9cbeeca05049 ("i2c: designware: Remove Cherry Trail PMIC I2C bus pm_disabled workaround"), but the flag most likely by mistake has been left in the Dw I2C drivers. Let's remove it. Signed-off-by: Serge Semin <Sergey.Semin@baikalelectronics.ru> Acked-by: Jarkko Nikula <jarkko.nikula@linux.intel.com> Cc: Alexey Malahov <Alexey.Malahov@baikalelectronics.ru> Cc: Thomas Bogendoerfer <tsbogend@alpha.franken.de> Cc: Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org> Cc: linux-mips@vger.kernel.org Cc: devicetree@vger.kernel.org --- Changelog v3: - Since MSCC and Baikal-T1 will be a part of the platform driver code, we have to preserve the MODEL_MASK macro to use it to filter the model flags during the IP-specific quirks activation. --- drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware-core.h | 3 +-- drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware-pcidrv.c | 1 - drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware-platdrv.c | 2 +- 3 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)