On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 8:17 PM, Chris Wilson <chris at chris-wilson.co.uk>
wrote:
> On Wed, ?7 Mar 2012 19:50:45 +0800, Daniel Kurtz <djkurtz at chromium.org>
> wrote:
>> There is no "disabled" port 0. ?So, don't even try to initialize/scan
>> it, etc. ?This saves a bit of time when initializing the driver, since
>> the we can avoid a 50ms timeout waiting for a device to respond on
>> a port that doesn't even exist.
>>
>> Similarly, don't initialize the reserved port, either.
>
>> @@ -150,32 +164,23 @@ static void set_data(void *data, int state_high)
>> ?static struct i2c_adapter *
>> ?intel_gpio_create(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv, u32 pin)
>> ?{
>> - ? ? static const int map_pin_to_reg[] = {
>> - ? ? ? ? ? ? 0,
>> - ? ? ? ? ? ? GPIOB,
>> - ? ? ? ? ? ? GPIOA,
>> - ? ? ? ? ? ? GPIOC,
>> - ? ? ? ? ? ? GPIOD,
>> - ? ? ? ? ? ? GPIOE,
>> - ? ? ? ? ? ? GPIOF,
>> - ? ? ? ? ? ? 0,
>> - ? ? };
>> ? ? ? struct intel_gpio *gpio;
>>
>> - ? ? if (pin >= ARRAY_SIZE(map_pin_to_reg) || !map_pin_to_reg[pin])
>
> And that doesn't do what your changelog proposes? Why?
This changelog proposes to optimize initialization of the gmbus ports,
not the gpio-bit-bang ports.
> -Chris
>
> --
> Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre
