| Message ID | 1596610933-32599-3-git-send-email-alain.volmat@st.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | spi: stm32: various driver enhancements | expand |
On Wed, Aug 05, 2020 at 09:01:57AM +0200, Alain Volmat wrote: > - rst = devm_reset_control_get_exclusive(&pdev->dev, NULL); > - if (!IS_ERR(rst)) { > + rst = devm_reset_control_get_optional_exclusive(&pdev->dev, NULL); > + if (rst) { > + if (IS_ERR(rst)) { > + ret = PTR_ERR(rst); > + if (ret != -EPROBE_DEFER) > + dev_err(&pdev->dev, "reset get failed: %d\n", > + ret); > + goto err_clk_disable; > + } This will not provide any diagnostics when deferring which isn't very helpful if there's issues.
On Wed, Aug 05, 2020 at 11:49:06AM +0100, Mark Brown wrote: > On Wed, Aug 05, 2020 at 09:01:57AM +0200, Alain Volmat wrote: > > > - rst = devm_reset_control_get_exclusive(&pdev->dev, NULL); > > - if (!IS_ERR(rst)) { > > + rst = devm_reset_control_get_optional_exclusive(&pdev->dev, NULL); > > + if (rst) { > > + if (IS_ERR(rst)) { > > + ret = PTR_ERR(rst); > > + if (ret != -EPROBE_DEFER) > > + dev_err(&pdev->dev, "reset get failed: %d\n", > > + ret); > > + goto err_clk_disable; > > + } > > This will not provide any diagnostics when deferring which isn't very > helpful if there's issues. Do you mean that a message when deferring would be needed ? I am worrying that this would lead to having too much noise during boot since probe deferring is kinda common. Of course it can also be due to a bad configuration of the kernel as well but having looked around I think that usually driver are rather silent in case of deferring.
On Fri, Aug 07, 2020 at 03:42:54PM +0200, Alain Volmat wrote: > On Wed, Aug 05, 2020 at 11:49:06AM +0100, Mark Brown wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 05, 2020 at 09:01:57AM +0200, Alain Volmat wrote: > > > - rst = devm_reset_control_get_exclusive(&pdev->dev, NULL); > > > - if (!IS_ERR(rst)) { > > > + rst = devm_reset_control_get_optional_exclusive(&pdev->dev, NULL); > > > + if (rst) { > > > + if (IS_ERR(rst)) { > > > + ret = PTR_ERR(rst); > > > + if (ret != -EPROBE_DEFER) > > > + dev_err(&pdev->dev, "reset get failed: %d\n", > > > + ret); > > > + goto err_clk_disable; > > > + } > > This will not provide any diagnostics when deferring which isn't very > > helpful if there's issues. > Do you mean that a message when deferring would be needed ? Yes, if for examaple the reset driver isn't being built then the driver will defer for ever waiting for it to instantiate and the user will have to have some method for figuring out what it's waiting for. > I am worrying that this would lead to having too much noise during boot > since probe deferring is kinda common. Of course it can also be due to a bad > configuration of the kernel as well but having looked around I think that > usually driver are rather silent in case of deferring. This is not something that should be open coded in your driver.
diff --git a/drivers/spi/spi-stm32.c b/drivers/spi/spi-stm32.c index 838d3ce3ebae..eaa416c551c9 100644 --- a/drivers/spi/spi-stm32.c +++ b/drivers/spi/spi-stm32.c @@ -1886,8 +1886,16 @@ static int stm32_spi_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) goto err_clk_disable; } - rst = devm_reset_control_get_exclusive(&pdev->dev, NULL); - if (!IS_ERR(rst)) { + rst = devm_reset_control_get_optional_exclusive(&pdev->dev, NULL); + if (rst) { + if (IS_ERR(rst)) { + ret = PTR_ERR(rst); + if (ret != -EPROBE_DEFER) + dev_err(&pdev->dev, "reset get failed: %d\n", + ret); + goto err_clk_disable; + } + reset_control_assert(rst); udelay(2); reset_control_deassert(rst);
Defer the probe operation when a reset controller device is expected but have not yet been probed. This change replaces use of devm_reset_control_get_exclusive() with devm_reset_control_get_optional_exclusive() as reset controller is optional which is now explicitly stated. Signed-off-by: Alain Volmat <alain.volmat@st.com> --- drivers/spi/spi-stm32.c | 12 ++++++++++-- 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)