On 03/05/16 13:31, Laxman Dewangan wrote:

On Tuesday 03 May 2016 06:04 PM, Jon Hunter wrote:

quoted

On 02/05/16 13:17, Laxman Dewangan wrote:

quoted

+
+    return tegra_io_rail_power_on(dpd_bit);

 From a readability standpoint the above seems weird because
tegra_io_pads_power_enable() takes an ID as the argument, translates it
to a bit value and passes it to tegra_io_rail_power_on() which also
takes an ID for the argument.

Yaah, I did not want to duplicate the implementation and hence it is there.
We will get rid of the older APIs once this is IN and new mechanism there.

quoted

quoted

+
+    bval = (io_volt_uv == 3300000) ? BIT(pwr_bit) : 0;
+
+    mutex_lock(&pmc->powergates_lock);
+    tegra_pmc_read_modify_write(PMC_PWR_DET, BIT(pwr_bit),
BIT(pwr_bit));
+    tegra_pmc_read_modify_write(PMC_PWR_DET_VAL, BIT(pwr_bit), bval);
+    mutex_unlock(&pmc->powergates_lock);

There are 4 instances of BIT(pwr_bit). May be we should do this once or
have tegra_io_pads_to_power_val() return the bit?

OK, will re-write this part.

quoted

quoted

+int tegra_io_pads_power_disable(int io_pad_id);
+int tegra_io_pads_power_is_enabled(int io_pad_id);

What I don't like here, is now we have two public APIs to do the same
job because tegra_io_pads_power_enable/disable() calls
tegra_io_rail_power_off/on() internally. Furthermore, the two APIs use
different ID definitions to accomplish the same job. This shouldn't be
necessary.

Currently SOR driver is using the tegra_io_rail_power_off/on() APIs.
Once the proper interface available then I will move sor driver to use
new method and then we can full get rid of older APIs and macros.

Till that, we need to have this.

I prefer it is done before this series. In other words, if we need a
proper enum for the rail/pad IDs then add one and convert any existing
drivers over to use any new APIs first. The other option is to live with
the existing API names.

Jon