[PATCH v8 24/24] gpio/omap: handle set_dataout reg capable IP on restore

[DebBarma, Tarun Kanti]

On Fri, Nov 4, 2011 at 10:23 PM, Kevin Hilman <khilman at ti.com> wrote:
> Tarun Kanti DebBarma <tarun.kanti at ti.com> writes:
>
>> From: Nishanth Menon <nm at ti.com>
>>
>> GPIO IP revisions such as those used in OMAP4 have a set_dataout
>> while the previous revisions used a single dataout register.
>> Depending on what is available restore the dataout settings
>> to the right register.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Nishanth Menon <nm at ti.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Tarun Kanti DebBarma <tarun.kanti at ti.com>
>> Reviewed-by: Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar at ti.com>
>> ---
>>  drivers/gpio/gpio-omap.c |    9 +++++++--
>>  1 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpio-omap.c b/drivers/gpio/gpio-omap.c
>> index 4009446..3df7a98 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpio/gpio-omap.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpio-omap.c
>> @@ -1073,7 +1073,7 @@ static int __devinit omap_gpio_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>       bank->get_context_loss_count = pdata->get_context_loss_count;
>>       bank->regs = pdata->regs;
>>
>> -     if (bank->regs->set_dataout && bank->regs->clr_dataout)
>> +     if (bank->regs->set_dataout)
>
> This change isn't right.
>
> The _set_gpio_dataout_reg function depends on the existence of
> ->clr_dataout too.
Ok, I will add the clr_dataout condtion as well.

>
>>               bank->set_dataout = _set_gpio_dataout_reg;
>>       else
>>               bank->set_dataout = _set_gpio_dataout_mask;
>> @@ -1351,7 +1351,12 @@ static void omap_gpio_restore_context(struct gpio_bank *bank)
>>                               bank->base + bank->regs->risingdetect);
>>       __raw_writel(bank->context.fallingdetect,
>>                               bank->base + bank->regs->fallingdetect);
>> -     __raw_writel(bank->context.dataout, bank->base + bank->regs->dataout);
>> +     if (bank->regs->set_dataout)
>
> Why the check again?  The check has already been done in probe.
>
> Just use bank->set_dataout() here.
Sure, i will make the change.
--
Tarun
>
> Kevin
>
>> +             __raw_writel(bank->context.dataout,
>> +                             bank->base + bank->regs->set_dataout);
>> +     else
>> +             __raw_writel(bank->context.dataout,
>> +                             bank->base + bank->regs->dataout);
>>       __raw_writel(bank->context.oe, bank->base + bank->regs->direction);
>>
>>       if (bank->dbck_enable_mask) {
>