From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754548AbeD3SmR (ORCPT ); Mon, 30 Apr 2018 14:42:17 -0400 Received: from mail-ua0-f177.google.com ([209.85.217.177]:35377 "EHLO mail-ua0-f177.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752534AbeD3SmO (ORCPT ); Mon, 30 Apr 2018 14:42:14 -0400 X-Google-Smtp-Source: AB8JxZocKvR9z0lCEUsrtF0GWkIJb9w0xEaQ9NfN1g7WLEXMAA7yPJ9NJUiFY69Xz0jGWQ1zbzPDGRaMbLfaNormLkc= MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1524817171-7258-1-git-send-email-tdas@codeaurora.org> References: <1524817171-7258-1-git-send-email-tdas@codeaurora.org> From: Doug Anderson Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2018 11:42:12 -0700 X-Google-Sender-Auth: knyCWcxW2cZbROl-d9Pt_EDu5lU Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] clk: qcom: gdsc: Add support to poll CFG register to check GDSC state To: Taniya Das Cc: Stephen Boyd , Michael Turquette , Andy Gross , David Brown , Rajendra Nayak , Odelu Kukatla , Amit Nischal , linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, "open list:ARM/QUALCOMM SUPPORT" , linux-clk , LKML Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi, On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 1:19 AM, Taniya Das wrote: > -static int gdsc_is_enabled(struct gdsc *sc, unsigned int reg) > +static int gdsc_is_enabled(struct gdsc *sc, bool en) > { > + unsigned int reg; > u32 val; > int ret; > > + if (sc->flags & POLL_CFG_GDSCR) > + reg = sc->gdscr + CFG_GDSCR_OFFSET; > + else > + reg = sc->gds_hw_ctrl ? sc->gds_hw_ctrl : sc->gdscr; nit: why two spaces after the "?" in this new patch? Should be just one. > diff --git a/drivers/clk/qcom/gdsc.h b/drivers/clk/qcom/gdsc.h > index 3964834..ac5f844 100644 > --- a/drivers/clk/qcom/gdsc.h > +++ b/drivers/clk/qcom/gdsc.h > @@ -53,6 +53,7 @@ struct gdsc { > #define VOTABLE BIT(0) > #define CLAMP_IO BIT(1) > #define HW_CTRL BIT(2) > +#define POLL_CFG_GDSCR BIT(5) This doesn't apply cleanly to clk-next because clk-next already has the old patch #1 and patch #2 from your series. You should have applied your patch to clk-next before sending out. Also a nit here is that you have two spaces before "BIT(5)" but all other entries in this list have a tab before them. You should be consistent and use a tab. In general I'd tend to assume that Stephen could handle this small merge conflict and fixing the whitespace issues when applying, but if he tells you to spin then you certainly should. I'll also say that I'm nowhere near an expert on gdsc but it looks like Stephen's previous comments were addressed and the patch seems sane in general. Stephen: feel free to add my Reviewed-by: if you wish when applying (or Taniya, if you end up spinning). -Doug