[alsa-devel] [PATCH 1/4] ALSA: pxa2xx: fix ac97 cold reset
Igor Grinberg
grinberg at compulab.co.il
Mon Jan 7 16:28:22 CET 2013
On 01/07/13 16:19, Mike Dunn wrote:
> On 01/07/2013 05:57 AM, Igor Grinberg wrote:
>> On 01/07/13 15:36, Mike Dunn wrote:
>>> On 01/07/2013 01:16 AM, Igor Grinberg wrote:
>>>> On 01/06/13 21:13, Mike Dunn wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> [..]
>>>
>>>
>>>>> static inline void pxa_ac97_cold_pxa27x(void)
>>>>> {
>>>>> + unsigned int timeout;
>>>>> +
>>>>> GCR &= GCR_COLD_RST; /* clear everything but nCRST */
>>>>> GCR &= ~GCR_COLD_RST; /* then assert nCRST */
>>>>>
>>>>> @@ -157,8 +159,10 @@ static inline void pxa_ac97_cold_pxa27x(void)
>>>>> clk_enable(ac97conf_clk);
>>>>> udelay(5);
>>>>> clk_disable(ac97conf_clk);
>>>>> - GCR = GCR_COLD_RST;
>>>>> - udelay(50);
>>>>> + GCR = GCR_COLD_RST | GCR_WARM_RST;
>>>>> + timeout = 100; /* wait for the codec-ready bit to be set */
>>>>> + while (!((GSR | gsr_bits) & (GSR_PCR | GSR_SCR)) && timeout--)
>>>>> + mdelay(1);
>>>>
>>>> Can we use msleep() instead?
>>>> May be this will require to change the granularity to 10...
>>>
>>>
>>> Probably. mdelay() is used by similiar code in the same file, so I just stayed
>>> consistent. The code runs very infrequently, so I didn't worry about it.
>>
>> Well, if we can, I think we'd better do, no?
>
>
> If you feel strongly about it, I'll defer to you. But again my arguments are
> (1) the code runs very infrequently, and (2) very similar code for the other pxa
> family siblings uses mdelay().
No, not too strong, but please, don't argument your code with something like:
"there are other places where this is done", because it might be done
improperly and just go in unnoticed.
--
Regards,
Igor.
More information about the Alsa-devel
mailing list