Patchwork [U-Boot] Improve Power Management in SMC911X driver.

login
register
mail settings
Submitter bertrand.cachet@heig-vd.ch
Date Nov. 14, 2011, 2:02 p.m.
Message ID <1321279329-32568-1-git-send-email-bertrand.cachet@heig-vd.ch>
Download mbox | patch
Permalink /patch/125542/
State Changes Requested
Headers show

Comments

bertrand.cachet@heig-vd.ch - Nov. 14, 2011, 2:02 p.m.
From datasheet, when READY bit is set inside PM_CTRL register, it means that
device is already in *normal* (D0) mode => it doesn't need to be wake-up.

With this patch, we only wake-up (writing on TEST_BYTE register) if PM_MODE
bits of PM_CTRL register is in D1/D2 mode.

Signed-off-by: Bertrand Cachet <bertrand.cachet@heig-vd.ch>
---
 drivers/net/smc911x.h |    8 ++++++--
 1 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
Igor Grinberg - Nov. 15, 2011, 6:49 a.m.
Hi Bertrand,

When you submit a new version of the same patch, you
should specify in the subject the version number and
in the body changes summary, just as example below:

for subject:
[PATCH v2] Improve Power Management in SMC911X driver

and for body see where it is placed:

On 11/14/11 16:02, Bertrand Cachet wrote:
>>From datasheet, when READY bit is set inside PM_CTRL register, it means that
> device is already in *normal* (D0) mode => it doesn't need to be wake-up.
> 
> With this patch, we only wake-up (writing on TEST_BYTE register) if PM_MODE
> bits of PM_CTRL register is in D1/D2 mode.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Bertrand Cachet <bertrand.cachet@heig-vd.ch>
> ---

v2 - fix multi-line comment style.

>  drivers/net/smc911x.h |    8 ++++++--
>  1 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/net/smc911x.h b/drivers/net/smc911x.h
> index 8ce08a9..61f7669 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/smc911x.h
> +++ b/drivers/net/smc911x.h
> @@ -471,8 +471,12 @@ static void smc911x_reset(struct eth_device *dev)
>  {
>  	int timeout;
>  
> -	/* Take out of PM setting first */
> -	if (smc911x_reg_read(dev, PMT_CTRL) & PMT_CTRL_READY) {
> +	/*  Take out of PM setting first */
> +	/*
> +	 *  If PMT_CTRL_READY bit is set to 1b => power management is 
> +	 *  already ready 
> +	 */

This still does not look good, because there is one line comment
and just after it a multi-line comment.
Isn't it makes sense to unify them into one multi-line comment?

> +	if ((smc911x_reg_read(dev, PMT_CTRL) & PMT_CTRL_READY) == 0) {
>  		/* Write to the bytetest will take out of powerdown */
>  		smc911x_reg_write(dev, BYTE_TEST, 0x0);
>

Patch

diff --git a/drivers/net/smc911x.h b/drivers/net/smc911x.h
index 8ce08a9..61f7669 100644
--- a/drivers/net/smc911x.h
+++ b/drivers/net/smc911x.h
@@ -471,8 +471,12 @@  static void smc911x_reset(struct eth_device *dev)
 {
 	int timeout;
 
-	/* Take out of PM setting first */
-	if (smc911x_reg_read(dev, PMT_CTRL) & PMT_CTRL_READY) {
+	/*  Take out of PM setting first */
+	/*
+	 *  If PMT_CTRL_READY bit is set to 1b => power management is 
+	 *  already ready 
+	 */
+	if ((smc911x_reg_read(dev, PMT_CTRL) & PMT_CTRL_READY) == 0) {
 		/* Write to the bytetest will take out of powerdown */
 		smc911x_reg_write(dev, BYTE_TEST, 0x0);