| Message ID | 1453715604-36856-9-git-send-email-blogic@openwrt.org (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
On Mon, 2016-01-25 at 10:53 +0100, John Crispin wrote: > With ore SoCs being added the list of helper functions like these would > grow. While at it also add a new flag "bridge" and use that insted of > pwrap_is_mt8173() where appropriate. typos? s/ore/more/ s/insted/instead/ I think you mean "has_bridge" flag? > > Signed-off-by: John Crispin <blogic@openwrt.org> > --- > drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-pmic-wrap.c | 27 +++++++++++---------------- > 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-pmic-wrap.c b/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-pmic-wrap.c > index 8bb091b..54553b4 100644 > --- a/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-pmic-wrap.c > +++ b/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-pmic-wrap.c > @@ -374,20 +374,11 @@ struct pmic_wrapper_type { > u32 int_en_all; > u32 spi_w; > u32 wdt_src; > + int has_bridge; How about using :1 for flag? Joe.C > int (*init_reg_clock)(struct pmic_wrapper *wrp); > int (*init_special)(struct pmic_wrapper *wrp); > }; > > -static inline int pwrap_is_mt8135(struct pmic_wrapper *wrp) > -{ > - return wrp->master->type == PWRAP_MT8135; > -} > - > -static inline int pwrap_is_mt8173(struct pmic_wrapper *wrp) > -{ > - return wrp->master->type == PWRAP_MT8173; > -} > - > static u32 pwrap_readl(struct pmic_wrapper *wrp, enum pwrap_regs reg) > { > return readl(wrp->base + wrp->master->regs[reg]); > @@ -619,11 +610,14 @@ static int pwrap_init_cipher(struct pmic_wrapper *wrp) > pwrap_writel(wrp, 0x1, PWRAP_CIPHER_KEY_SEL); > pwrap_writel(wrp, 0x2, PWRAP_CIPHER_IV_SEL); > > - if (pwrap_is_mt8135(wrp)) { > + switch (wrp->master->type) { > + case PWRAP_MT8135: > pwrap_writel(wrp, 1, PWRAP_CIPHER_LOAD); > pwrap_writel(wrp, 1, PWRAP_CIPHER_START); > - } else { > + break; > + case PWRAP_MT8173: > pwrap_writel(wrp, 1, PWRAP_CIPHER_EN); > + break; > } > > /* Config cipher mode @PMIC */ > @@ -713,7 +707,7 @@ static int pwrap_init(struct pmic_wrapper *wrp) > if (wrp->rstc_bridge) > reset_control_reset(wrp->rstc_bridge); > > - if (pwrap_is_mt8173(wrp)) { > + if (wrp->master->type == PWRAP_MT8173) { > /* Enable DCM */ > pwrap_writel(wrp, 3, PWRAP_DCM_EN); > pwrap_writel(wrp, 0, PWRAP_DCM_DBC_PRD); > @@ -773,7 +767,7 @@ static int pwrap_init(struct pmic_wrapper *wrp) > pwrap_writel(wrp, PWRAP_DEW_CRC_VAL, PWRAP_SIG_ADR); > pwrap_writel(wrp, wrp->master->arb_en_all, PWRAP_HIPRIO_ARB_EN); > > - if (pwrap_is_mt8135(wrp)) > + if (wrp->master->type == PWRAP_MT8135) > pwrap_writel(wrp, 0x7, PWRAP_RRARB_EN); > > pwrap_writel(wrp, 0x1, PWRAP_WACS0_EN); > @@ -792,7 +786,7 @@ static int pwrap_init(struct pmic_wrapper *wrp) > pwrap_writel(wrp, 1, PWRAP_INIT_DONE0); > pwrap_writel(wrp, 1, PWRAP_INIT_DONE1); > > - if (pwrap_is_mt8135(wrp)) { > + if (wrp->master->has_bridge) { > writel(1, wrp->bridge_base + PWRAP_MT8135_BRIDGE_INIT_DONE3); > writel(1, wrp->bridge_base + PWRAP_MT8135_BRIDGE_INIT_DONE4); > } > @@ -830,6 +824,7 @@ static struct pmic_wrapper_type pwrap_mt8135 = { > .int_en_all = BIT(31) | BIT(1), > .spi_w = PWRAP_MAN_CMD_SPI_WRITE, > .wdt_src = PWRAP_WDT_SRC_MASK_ALL, > + .has_bridge = 1, > .init_reg_clock = pwrap_mt8135_init_reg_clock, > .init_special = pwrap_mt8135_init_special, > }; > @@ -888,7 +883,7 @@ static int pwrap_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > return ret; > } > > - if (pwrap_is_mt8135(wrp)) { > + if (wrp->master->has_bridge) { > res = platform_get_resource_byname(pdev, IORESOURCE_MEM, > "pwrap-bridge"); > wrp->bridge_base = devm_ioremap_resource(wrp->dev, res);
On 25/01/16 10:53, John Crispin wrote: > With ore SoCs being added the list of helper functions like these would The commit message is something strange: "With every new SoC being added..." maybe? > grow. While at it also add a new flag "bridge" and use that insted of s/insted/instead > pwrap_is_mt8173() where appropriate. > > Signed-off-by: John Crispin <blogic@openwrt.org> > --- > drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-pmic-wrap.c | 27 +++++++++++---------------- > 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-pmic-wrap.c b/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-pmic-wrap.c > index 8bb091b..54553b4 100644 > --- a/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-pmic-wrap.c > +++ b/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-pmic-wrap.c > @@ -374,20 +374,11 @@ struct pmic_wrapper_type { > u32 int_en_all; > u32 spi_w; > u32 wdt_src; > + int has_bridge; > int (*init_reg_clock)(struct pmic_wrapper *wrp); > int (*init_special)(struct pmic_wrapper *wrp); > }; > > -static inline int pwrap_is_mt8135(struct pmic_wrapper *wrp) > -{ > - return wrp->master->type == PWRAP_MT8135; > -} > - > -static inline int pwrap_is_mt8173(struct pmic_wrapper *wrp) > -{ > - return wrp->master->type == PWRAP_MT8173; > -} > - > static u32 pwrap_readl(struct pmic_wrapper *wrp, enum pwrap_regs reg) > { > return readl(wrp->base + wrp->master->regs[reg]); > @@ -619,11 +610,14 @@ static int pwrap_init_cipher(struct pmic_wrapper *wrp) > pwrap_writel(wrp, 0x1, PWRAP_CIPHER_KEY_SEL); > pwrap_writel(wrp, 0x2, PWRAP_CIPHER_IV_SEL); > > - if (pwrap_is_mt8135(wrp)) { > + switch (wrp->master->type) { > + case PWRAP_MT8135: > pwrap_writel(wrp, 1, PWRAP_CIPHER_LOAD); > pwrap_writel(wrp, 1, PWRAP_CIPHER_START); > - } else { > + break; > + case PWRAP_MT8173: > pwrap_writel(wrp, 1, PWRAP_CIPHER_EN); > + break; > } > > /* Config cipher mode @PMIC */ > @@ -713,7 +707,7 @@ static int pwrap_init(struct pmic_wrapper *wrp) > if (wrp->rstc_bridge) > reset_control_reset(wrp->rstc_bridge); > > - if (pwrap_is_mt8173(wrp)) { > + if (wrp->master->type == PWRAP_MT8173) { > /* Enable DCM */ > pwrap_writel(wrp, 3, PWRAP_DCM_EN); > pwrap_writel(wrp, 0, PWRAP_DCM_DBC_PRD); > @@ -773,7 +767,7 @@ static int pwrap_init(struct pmic_wrapper *wrp) > pwrap_writel(wrp, PWRAP_DEW_CRC_VAL, PWRAP_SIG_ADR); > pwrap_writel(wrp, wrp->master->arb_en_all, PWRAP_HIPRIO_ARB_EN); > > - if (pwrap_is_mt8135(wrp)) > + if (wrp->master->type == PWRAP_MT8135) > pwrap_writel(wrp, 0x7, PWRAP_RRARB_EN); > > pwrap_writel(wrp, 0x1, PWRAP_WACS0_EN); > @@ -792,7 +786,7 @@ static int pwrap_init(struct pmic_wrapper *wrp) > pwrap_writel(wrp, 1, PWRAP_INIT_DONE0); > pwrap_writel(wrp, 1, PWRAP_INIT_DONE1); > > - if (pwrap_is_mt8135(wrp)) { > + if (wrp->master->has_bridge) { > writel(1, wrp->bridge_base + PWRAP_MT8135_BRIDGE_INIT_DONE3); > writel(1, wrp->bridge_base + PWRAP_MT8135_BRIDGE_INIT_DONE4); > } > @@ -830,6 +824,7 @@ static struct pmic_wrapper_type pwrap_mt8135 = { > .int_en_all = BIT(31) | BIT(1), > .spi_w = PWRAP_MAN_CMD_SPI_WRITE, > .wdt_src = PWRAP_WDT_SRC_MASK_ALL, > + .has_bridge = 1, > .init_reg_clock = pwrap_mt8135_init_reg_clock, > .init_special = pwrap_mt8135_init_special, > }; Please set has_bridge explicitly for mt8173.
On 01/02/2016 11:55, Matthias Brugger wrote: > > > On 25/01/16 10:53, John Crispin wrote: >> With ore SoCs being added the list of helper functions like these would > > The commit message is something strange: > "With every new SoC being added..." maybe? > >> grow. While at it also add a new flag "bridge" and use that insted of > > s/insted/instead > >> pwrap_is_mt8173() where appropriate. you are lookign at V3 of the series, V4 has this fix done already [...] >> } >> @@ -830,6 +824,7 @@ static struct pmic_wrapper_type pwrap_mt8135 = { >> .int_en_all = BIT(31) | BIT(1), >> .spi_w = PWRAP_MAN_CMD_SPI_WRITE, >> .wdt_src = PWRAP_WDT_SRC_MASK_ALL, >> + .has_bridge = 1, >> .init_reg_clock = pwrap_mt8135_init_reg_clock, >> .init_special = pwrap_mt8135_init_special, >> }; > > Please set has_bridge explicitly for mt8173. I dont get it. the original code never did that. John > > _______________________________________________ > Linux-mediatek mailing list > Linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org > http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mediatek
On 01/02/16 12:00, John Crispin wrote: > > > On 01/02/2016 11:55, Matthias Brugger wrote: >> >> >> On 25/01/16 10:53, John Crispin wrote: >>> With ore SoCs being added the list of helper functions like these would >> >> The commit message is something strange: >> "With every new SoC being added..." maybe? >> >>> grow. While at it also add a new flag "bridge" and use that insted of >> >> s/insted/instead >> >>> pwrap_is_mt8173() where appropriate. > > you are lookign at V3 of the series, V4 has this fix done already > > [...] > > >>> } >>> @@ -830,6 +824,7 @@ static struct pmic_wrapper_type pwrap_mt8135 = { >>> .int_en_all = BIT(31) | BIT(1), >>> .spi_w = PWRAP_MAN_CMD_SPI_WRITE, >>> .wdt_src = PWRAP_WDT_SRC_MASK_ALL, >>> + .has_bridge = 1, >>> .init_reg_clock = pwrap_mt8135_init_reg_clock, >>> .init_special = pwrap_mt8135_init_special, >>> }; >> >> Please set has_bridge explicitly for mt8173. > > I dont get it. the original code never did that. > has_bridge was introduced by this patch, but you don't set it explicitly to 0 in pwrap_mt8173. Just as I see it, please try to write a summary to every new version of a patch set which explains what you changed between one version and another. This will help a lot making the review easier. Thanks, Matthias
On 01/02/2016 12:11, Matthias Brugger wrote: > > > On 01/02/16 12:00, John Crispin wrote: >> >> >> On 01/02/2016 11:55, Matthias Brugger wrote: >>> >>> >>> On 25/01/16 10:53, John Crispin wrote: >>>> With ore SoCs being added the list of helper functions like these would >>> >>> The commit message is something strange: >>> "With every new SoC being added..." maybe? >>> >>>> grow. While at it also add a new flag "bridge" and use that insted of >>> >>> s/insted/instead >>> >>>> pwrap_is_mt8173() where appropriate. >> >> you are lookign at V3 of the series, V4 has this fix done already >> >> [...] >> >> >>>> } >>>> @@ -830,6 +824,7 @@ static struct pmic_wrapper_type pwrap_mt8135 = { >>>> .int_en_all = BIT(31) | BIT(1), >>>> .spi_w = PWRAP_MAN_CMD_SPI_WRITE, >>>> .wdt_src = PWRAP_WDT_SRC_MASK_ALL, >>>> + .has_bridge = 1, >>>> .init_reg_clock = pwrap_mt8135_init_reg_clock, >>>> .init_special = pwrap_mt8135_init_special, >>>> }; >>> >>> Please set has_bridge explicitly for mt8173. >> >> I dont get it. the original code never did that. >> > > has_bridge was introduced by this patch, but you don't set it explicitly > to 0 in pwrap_mt8173. > > Just as I see it, please try to write a summary to every new version of > a patch set which explains what you changed between one version and > another. This will help a lot making the review easier. > > Thanks, > Matthias > You missed the "to zero" part before. now the comment makes sense. I can set it to 0 if it is more obvious for you in that case. general consent is to not declare statics to 0. check_patch.pl will actually complain about those declarations. that is why i was confused. John
On 01/02/16 12:15, John Crispin wrote: > > > On 01/02/2016 12:11, Matthias Brugger wrote: >> >> >> On 01/02/16 12:00, John Crispin wrote: >>> >>> >>> On 01/02/2016 11:55, Matthias Brugger wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> On 25/01/16 10:53, John Crispin wrote: >>>>> With ore SoCs being added the list of helper functions like these would >>>> >>>> The commit message is something strange: >>>> "With every new SoC being added..." maybe? >>>> >>>>> grow. While at it also add a new flag "bridge" and use that insted of >>>> >>>> s/insted/instead >>>> >>>>> pwrap_is_mt8173() where appropriate. >>> >>> you are lookign at V3 of the series, V4 has this fix done already >>> >>> [...] >>> >>> >>>>> } >>>>> @@ -830,6 +824,7 @@ static struct pmic_wrapper_type pwrap_mt8135 = { >>>>> .int_en_all = BIT(31) | BIT(1), >>>>> .spi_w = PWRAP_MAN_CMD_SPI_WRITE, >>>>> .wdt_src = PWRAP_WDT_SRC_MASK_ALL, >>>>> + .has_bridge = 1, >>>>> .init_reg_clock = pwrap_mt8135_init_reg_clock, >>>>> .init_special = pwrap_mt8135_init_special, >>>>> }; >>>> >>>> Please set has_bridge explicitly for mt8173. >>> >>> I dont get it. the original code never did that. >>> >> >> has_bridge was introduced by this patch, but you don't set it explicitly >> to 0 in pwrap_mt8173. >> >> Just as I see it, please try to write a summary to every new version of >> a patch set which explains what you changed between one version and >> another. This will help a lot making the review easier. >> >> Thanks, >> Matthias >> > > > You missed the "to zero" part before. now the comment makes sense. I can > set it to 0 if it is more obvious for you in that case. > > general consent is to not declare statics to 0. check_patch.pl will > actually complain about those declarations. that is why i was confused. If that's the case, then we accept the authority of check_patch.pl ;) I didn't know that, so just leave has_bridge as it was. Regards, Matthias
On Mon, 2016-02-01 at 12:27 +0100, Matthias Brugger wrote: > > On 01/02/16 12:15, John Crispin wrote: > > > > > > On 01/02/2016 12:11, Matthias Brugger wrote: > >> > >> > >> On 01/02/16 12:00, John Crispin wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>> On 01/02/2016 11:55, Matthias Brugger wrote: > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> On 25/01/16 10:53, John Crispin wrote: > >>>>> With ore SoCs being added the list of helper functions like these would > >>>> > >>>> The commit message is something strange: > >>>> "With every new SoC being added..." maybe? > >>>> > >>>>> grow. While at it also add a new flag "bridge" and use that insted of > >>>> > >>>> s/insted/instead > >>>> > >>>>> pwrap_is_mt8173() where appropriate. > >>> > >>> you are lookign at V3 of the series, V4 has this fix done already > >>> > >>> [...] > >>> > >>> > >>>>> } > >>>>> @@ -830,6 +824,7 @@ static struct pmic_wrapper_type pwrap_mt8135 = { > >>>>> .int_en_all = BIT(31) | BIT(1), > >>>>> .spi_w = PWRAP_MAN_CMD_SPI_WRITE, > >>>>> .wdt_src = PWRAP_WDT_SRC_MASK_ALL, > >>>>> + .has_bridge = 1, > >>>>> .init_reg_clock = pwrap_mt8135_init_reg_clock, > >>>>> .init_special = pwrap_mt8135_init_special, > >>>>> }; > >>>> > >>>> Please set has_bridge explicitly for mt8173. > >>> > >>> I dont get it. the original code never did that. > >>> > >> > >> has_bridge was introduced by this patch, but you don't set it explicitly > >> to 0 in pwrap_mt8173. > >> > >> Just as I see it, please try to write a summary to every new version of > >> a patch set which explains what you changed between one version and > >> another. This will help a lot making the review easier. > >> > >> Thanks, > >> Matthias > >> > > > > > > You missed the "to zero" part before. now the comment makes sense. I can > > set it to 0 if it is more obvious for you in that case. > > > > general consent is to not declare statics to 0. check_patch.pl will > > actually complain about those declarations. that is why i was confused. > > If that's the case, then we accept the authority of check_patch.pl ;) > I didn't know that, so just leave has_bridge as it was. I believe checkpatch only complain for global/static variables initializers, not inside a struct initializers even when they are global. In MTK i2c drivers drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-mt65xx.c, we always explicitly init flags in compatible struct, IMHO it make support feature for each IC more clearly. This does not trigger any warning from checkpatch. Joe.C
On 04/02/16 10:36, Yingjoe Chen wrote: > On Mon, 2016-02-01 at 12:27 +0100, Matthias Brugger wrote: >> >> On 01/02/16 12:15, John Crispin wrote: >>> >>> >>> On 01/02/2016 12:11, Matthias Brugger wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> On 01/02/16 12:00, John Crispin wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 01/02/2016 11:55, Matthias Brugger wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On 25/01/16 10:53, John Crispin wrote: >>>>>>> With ore SoCs being added the list of helper functions like these would >>>>>> >>>>>> The commit message is something strange: >>>>>> "With every new SoC being added..." maybe? >>>>>> >>>>>>> grow. While at it also add a new flag "bridge" and use that insted of >>>>>> >>>>>> s/insted/instead >>>>>> >>>>>>> pwrap_is_mt8173() where appropriate. >>>>> >>>>> you are lookign at V3 of the series, V4 has this fix done already >>>>> >>>>> [...] >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>> } >>>>>>> @@ -830,6 +824,7 @@ static struct pmic_wrapper_type pwrap_mt8135 = { >>>>>>> .int_en_all = BIT(31) | BIT(1), >>>>>>> .spi_w = PWRAP_MAN_CMD_SPI_WRITE, >>>>>>> .wdt_src = PWRAP_WDT_SRC_MASK_ALL, >>>>>>> + .has_bridge = 1, >>>>>>> .init_reg_clock = pwrap_mt8135_init_reg_clock, >>>>>>> .init_special = pwrap_mt8135_init_special, >>>>>>> }; >>>>>> >>>>>> Please set has_bridge explicitly for mt8173. >>>>> >>>>> I dont get it. the original code never did that. >>>>> >>>> >>>> has_bridge was introduced by this patch, but you don't set it explicitly >>>> to 0 in pwrap_mt8173. >>>> >>>> Just as I see it, please try to write a summary to every new version of >>>> a patch set which explains what you changed between one version and >>>> another. This will help a lot making the review easier. >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Matthias >>>> >>> >>> >>> You missed the "to zero" part before. now the comment makes sense. I can >>> set it to 0 if it is more obvious for you in that case. >>> >>> general consent is to not declare statics to 0. check_patch.pl will >>> actually complain about those declarations. that is why i was confused. >> >> If that's the case, then we accept the authority of check_patch.pl ;) >> I didn't know that, so just leave has_bridge as it was. > > I believe checkpatch only complain for global/static variables > initializers, not inside a struct initializers even when they are > global. > > In MTK i2c drivers drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-mt65xx.c, we always explicitly > init flags in compatible struct, IMHO it make support feature for each > IC more clearly. This does not trigger any warning from checkpatch. > Ok, thanks for clarification.
diff --git a/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-pmic-wrap.c b/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-pmic-wrap.c index 8bb091b..54553b4 100644 --- a/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-pmic-wrap.c +++ b/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-pmic-wrap.c @@ -374,20 +374,11 @@ struct pmic_wrapper_type { u32 int_en_all; u32 spi_w; u32 wdt_src; + int has_bridge; int (*init_reg_clock)(struct pmic_wrapper *wrp); int (*init_special)(struct pmic_wrapper *wrp); }; -static inline int pwrap_is_mt8135(struct pmic_wrapper *wrp) -{ - return wrp->master->type == PWRAP_MT8135; -} - -static inline int pwrap_is_mt8173(struct pmic_wrapper *wrp) -{ - return wrp->master->type == PWRAP_MT8173; -} - static u32 pwrap_readl(struct pmic_wrapper *wrp, enum pwrap_regs reg) { return readl(wrp->base + wrp->master->regs[reg]); @@ -619,11 +610,14 @@ static int pwrap_init_cipher(struct pmic_wrapper *wrp) pwrap_writel(wrp, 0x1, PWRAP_CIPHER_KEY_SEL); pwrap_writel(wrp, 0x2, PWRAP_CIPHER_IV_SEL); - if (pwrap_is_mt8135(wrp)) { + switch (wrp->master->type) { + case PWRAP_MT8135: pwrap_writel(wrp, 1, PWRAP_CIPHER_LOAD); pwrap_writel(wrp, 1, PWRAP_CIPHER_START); - } else { + break; + case PWRAP_MT8173: pwrap_writel(wrp, 1, PWRAP_CIPHER_EN); + break; } /* Config cipher mode @PMIC */ @@ -713,7 +707,7 @@ static int pwrap_init(struct pmic_wrapper *wrp) if (wrp->rstc_bridge) reset_control_reset(wrp->rstc_bridge); - if (pwrap_is_mt8173(wrp)) { + if (wrp->master->type == PWRAP_MT8173) { /* Enable DCM */ pwrap_writel(wrp, 3, PWRAP_DCM_EN); pwrap_writel(wrp, 0, PWRAP_DCM_DBC_PRD); @@ -773,7 +767,7 @@ static int pwrap_init(struct pmic_wrapper *wrp) pwrap_writel(wrp, PWRAP_DEW_CRC_VAL, PWRAP_SIG_ADR); pwrap_writel(wrp, wrp->master->arb_en_all, PWRAP_HIPRIO_ARB_EN); - if (pwrap_is_mt8135(wrp)) + if (wrp->master->type == PWRAP_MT8135) pwrap_writel(wrp, 0x7, PWRAP_RRARB_EN); pwrap_writel(wrp, 0x1, PWRAP_WACS0_EN); @@ -792,7 +786,7 @@ static int pwrap_init(struct pmic_wrapper *wrp) pwrap_writel(wrp, 1, PWRAP_INIT_DONE0); pwrap_writel(wrp, 1, PWRAP_INIT_DONE1); - if (pwrap_is_mt8135(wrp)) { + if (wrp->master->has_bridge) { writel(1, wrp->bridge_base + PWRAP_MT8135_BRIDGE_INIT_DONE3); writel(1, wrp->bridge_base + PWRAP_MT8135_BRIDGE_INIT_DONE4); } @@ -830,6 +824,7 @@ static struct pmic_wrapper_type pwrap_mt8135 = { .int_en_all = BIT(31) | BIT(1), .spi_w = PWRAP_MAN_CMD_SPI_WRITE, .wdt_src = PWRAP_WDT_SRC_MASK_ALL, + .has_bridge = 1, .init_reg_clock = pwrap_mt8135_init_reg_clock, .init_special = pwrap_mt8135_init_special, }; @@ -888,7 +883,7 @@ static int pwrap_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) return ret; } - if (pwrap_is_mt8135(wrp)) { + if (wrp->master->has_bridge) { res = platform_get_resource_byname(pdev, IORESOURCE_MEM, "pwrap-bridge"); wrp->bridge_base = devm_ioremap_resource(wrp->dev, res);
With ore SoCs being added the list of helper functions like these would grow. While at it also add a new flag "bridge" and use that insted of pwrap_is_mt8173() where appropriate. Signed-off-by: John Crispin <blogic@openwrt.org> --- drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-pmic-wrap.c | 27 +++++++++++---------------- 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)