[PATCH v9 2/3] PCI: rockchip: Simplify reset control handling by using reset_control_bulk*() function

[Anand Moon]

Hi

On Thu, 17 Oct 2024 at 10:58, Manivannan Sadhasivam
<manivannan.sadhasivam at linaro.org> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Oct 17, 2024 at 09:17:35AM +0530, Anand Moon wrote:
> > Hi Manivannan,
> >
> > On Wed, 16 Oct 2024 at 23:53, Manivannan Sadhasivam
> > <manivannan.sadhasivam at linaro.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wed, Oct 16, 2024 at 05:19:07PM +0530, Anand Moon wrote:
> > > > Currently, the driver acquires and asserts/deasserts the resets
> > > > individually thereby making the driver complex to read. But this
> > > > can be simplified by using the reset_control_bulk APIs.
> > > > Use devm_reset_control_bulk_get_exclusive() API to acquire all
> > > > the resets and use reset_control_bulk_{assert/deassert}() APIs to
> > > > assert/deassert them in bulk.
> > > >
> > > > Following the recommendations in 'Rockchip RK3399 TRM v1.3 Part2':
> > > >
> > > > 1. Split the reset controls into two groups as per section '17.5.8.1.1 PCIe
> > > > as Root Complex'.
> > > >
> > > > 2. Deassert the 'Pipe, MGMT Sticky, MGMT, Core' resets in groups as per
> > > > section '17.5.8.1.1 PCIe as Root Complex'. This is accomplished using the
> > > > reset_control_bulk APIs.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Anand Moon <linux.amoon at gmail.com>
> > > > ---
> > > > v9: Improved the commit message and try to fix few review comments.
> > >
> > > You haven't fixed all of them... Please take a look at all of my comments.
> >
> > It is becoming a nightmare for me, my confidence is a the lowest.
>
> Me too. It makes me go crazy if the trivial comments are not addressed in
> multiple revisions and it results in waste of time for both of us.
>

I must apologize to you for my failure not being able to address this.
I promise to tidy up from my end in the future.

> > Can you fix this while applying or I will resend it with the fix?
>
> I don't merge the dwc patches, so I cannot do that. But what's preventing you
> from addressing those comments. You cannot put the burden on the maintainers for
> your mistake, sorry.
>
Ok I understand this will try to send in the next version
> - Mani
>

Thanks
-Anand