On Thu 21 Aug 06:22 PDT 2014, Lee Jones wrote:

quoted

diff --git a/drivers/mfd/qcom_rpm.c b/drivers/mfd/qcom_rpm.c
+static const struct qcom_rpm_data msm8660_template = {
+	.version = -1,

-1?

2 would be a better number...

quoted

+	.resource_table = msm8660_rpm_resource_table,
+	.n_resources = ARRAY_SIZE(msm8660_rpm_resource_table),
+};

[...]

quoted

+struct qcom_rpm *dev_get_qcom_rpm(struct device *dev)
+{
+	return dev_get_drvdata(dev);
+}
+EXPORT_SYMBOL(dev_get_qcom_rpm);

No need for this at all.  Use dev_get_drvdata() direct instead.

I see that others have put this as static inline in the header file, so I will
follow that. I don't want to expose this directly in the implementation of the
clients.

Let me know if you object.

[...]

quoted

+static int qcom_rpm_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
+{

[...]

quoted

+
+	res = platform_get_resource(pdev, IORESOURCE_MEM, 0);
+	rpm->status_regs = devm_ioremap_resource(&pdev->dev, res);
+	rpm->ctrl_regs = rpm->status_regs + 0x400;
+	rpm->req_regs = rpm->status_regs + 0x600;
+	if (IS_ERR(rpm->status_regs))
+		return PTR_ERR(rpm->status_regs);

You should probably do this _before_ using it above.

There's no difference in behaviour, but it just feels cleaner than:

res = platform_get_resource(pdev, IORESOURCE_MEM, 0);
rpm->status_regs = devm_ioremap_resource(&pdev->dev, res);
if (IS_ERR(rpm->status_regs))
	return PTR_ERR(rpm->status_regs);
rpm->ctrl_regs = rpm->status_regs + 0x400;
rpm->req_regs = rpm->status_regs + 0x600;

If you don't like it, I'll change it.

[...]

quoted

+
+	writel(fw_version[0], RPM_CTRL_REG(rpm, 0));
+	writel(fw_version[1], RPM_CTRL_REG(rpm, 1));
+	writel(fw_version[2], RPM_CTRL_REG(rpm, 2));

A comment documenting what this is doing would be helpful here.

Sounds reasonable, this seems to be incorrect now that I had to investigate
what's really happening. So I'll update it.

[...]

quoted

+}
+
+static int qcom_rpm_remove_child(struct device *dev, void *unused)
+{
+	platform_device_unregister(to_platform_device(dev));
+	return 0;
+}
+
+static int qcom_rpm_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
+{
+	device_for_each_child(&pdev->dev, NULL, qcom_rpm_remove_child);

of_platform_depopulate()?

Forgot that we had that now, will update.

quoted

+	return 0;
+}
+
+static struct platform_driver qcom_rpm_driver = {
+	.probe = qcom_rpm_probe,
+	.remove = qcom_rpm_remove,
+	.driver  = {
+		.name  = "qcom_rpm",
+		.owner = THIS_MODULE,

Remove this line, it's taken care of for you.

OK

quoted

+		.of_match_table = qcom_rpm_of_match,
+	},
+};
+
+static int __init qcom_rpm_init(void)
+{
+	return platform_driver_register(&qcom_rpm_driver);
+}
+arch_initcall(qcom_rpm_init);
+
+static void __exit qcom_rpm_exit(void)
+{
+	platform_driver_unregister(&qcom_rpm_driver);
+}
+module_exit(qcom_rpm_exit)
+
+MODULE_DESCRIPTION("Qualcomm Resource Power Manager driver");
+MODULE_LICENSE("GPL v2");

No one authored this driver?

Thought that was optional, will update.


Thanks for the review!

Regards,
Bjorn