On Friday 26 August 2011 01:53 AM, Kevin Hilman wrote:
Santosh<santosh.shilim...@ti.com> writes:
On Thursday 04 August 2011 04:34 PM, Tarun Kanti DebBarma wrote:
From: Charulatha V<ch...@ti.com>
Currently gpio_context array used to save gpio bank's context, is used only for
OMAP3 architecture. Move gpio_context as part of gpio_bank structure so that it
can be specific to each gpio bank and can be used for any OMAP architecture
Signed-off-by: Charulatha V<ch...@ti.com>
---
Few comments.
[...]
@@ -1494,33 +1490,31 @@ void omap2_gpio_resume_after_idle(void)
void omap_gpio_save_context(void)
{
struct gpio_bank *bank;
- int i = 0;
list_for_each_entry(bank,&omap_gpio_list, node) {
- i++;
if (!bank->loses_context)
continue;
- gpio_context[i].irqenable1 =
+ bank->context.irqenable1 =
__raw_readl(bank->base + OMAP24XX_GPIO_IRQENABLE1);
- gpio_context[i].irqenable2 =
+ bank->context.irqenable2 =
__raw_readl(bank->base + OMAP24XX_GPIO_IRQENABLE2);
The context restore procedure should be done carefully. For instance
IRQ enabled register should be restored last to avoid any spurious
interrupts.
For the sake of clean, easy-to-review patches, this kind of functional
change should be a separate patch.
The goal of $SUBJECT patch is simply to move the context struct into the
bank struct, not change the order of the save restore.
Any changing of the order of save/restore should be in a dedicated patch
with a descriptive changelog since that is changing behavior of the code.
Agree.
Regards
Santosh
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
