Dear Myungjoo,
On 01/19/2015 06:20 PM, MyungJoo Ham wrote:
>>
>> This patch adds the generic exynos bus frequency driver for memory bus
>> with DEVFREQ framework. The Samsung Exynos SoCs have the common architecture
>> for memory bus between DRAM memory and MMC/sub IP in SoC. This driver can
>> support the memory bus frequency driver for Exynos SoCs.
>>
>> Each memory bus block has a clock for memory bus speed and frequency
>> table which is changed according to the utilization of memory bus on runtime.
>> And then each memory bus group has the one more memory bus blocks and
>> OPP table (including frequency and voltage), regulator, devfreq-event
>> devices.
>>
>> There are a little difference about the number of memory bus because each
>> Exynos
>> SoC have the different sub-IP and different memory bus speed. In spite of
>> this
>> difference among Exynos SoCs, we can support almost Exynos SoC by adding
>> unique data of memory bus to devicetree file.
>>
>> Cc: Myungjoo Ham <myungjoo....@samsung.com>
>> Cc: Kyungmin Park <kyungmin.p...@samsung.com>
>> Cc: Kukjin Kim <kg...@kernel.org>
>> Signed-off-by: Chanwoo Choi <cw00.c...@samsung.com>
>> ---
>> drivers/devfreq/Kconfig | 15 +
>> drivers/devfreq/Makefile | 1 +
>> drivers/devfreq/exynos/Makefile | 1 +
>> drivers/devfreq/exynos/exynos-bus.c | 598
>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> 4 files changed, 615 insertions(+)
>> create mode 100644 drivers/devfreq/exynos/exynos-bus.c
>>
>
> []
>
>> +static void exynos_bus_exit(struct device *dev)
>> +{
>> + struct exynos_memory_bus *bus = dev_get_drvdata(dev);
>> + int i, ret;
>> +
>> + ret = exynos_bus_disable_edev(bus);
>> + if (ret < 0)
>> + dev_warn(dev, "failed to disable the devfreq-event devices\n");
>> +
>> + for (i = 0; i < bus->block_count; i++)
>> + clk_disable_unprepare(bus->block[i].clk);
>> +
>> + if (regulator_is_enabled(bus->regulator))
>> + regulator_disable(bus->regulator);
>
> This is_enabled check is itchy.
>
> Why do you need this here?
> Please let me know what kind of errors here.
> (note that this may simply hide errors made by other drivers)
>
> Adding this condition does not introduce additional error, but
> could you please let me know why it is here? This is supposed to be
> paired with probe.
The regulator_is_enabled() is not necessary according to your comment.
I'll remove it.
>
>
> Except this point (valid if addressed or {explained and understood}),
> Acked-by: MyungJoo Ham <myungjoo....@samsung.com>
Thanks for your review.
Best Regards,
Chanwoo Choi
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
