On Thu, 28 Mar 2024 14:01:22 +0100
Stefan Roese <s...@denx.de> wrote:

> On 3/28/24 12:21, Marek Behún wrote:
> > On Thu, 28 Mar 2024 11:04:45 +0100
> > Stefan Roese <s...@denx.de> wrote:
> >   
> >>> +static int mvebu_sysreset_request(struct udevice *dev, enum sysreset_t 
> >>> type)
> >>> +{
> >>> + struct regmap *regmap = syscon_get_regmap(dev->parent);
> >>> + uint bit;
> >>> +
> >>> + if (type != SYSRESET_COLD)
> >>> +         return -EPROTONOSUPPORT;
> >>> +
> >>> + bit = MVEBU_GLOBAL_SOFT_RST_BIT;
> >>> +
> >>> + regmap_update_bits(regmap, MVEBU_RSTOUTN_MASK_REG, bit, bit);
> >>> + regmap_update_bits(regmap, MVEBU_SYS_SOFT_RST_REG, bit, bit);
> >>> +
> >>> + while (1)
> >>> +         ;  
> >>
> >> A comment before this endless loop might be helpful here.  
> > 
> > The code does the same as reset_cpu() in cpu.c, and the while() cycle
> > is not commented there.  
> 
> Sure, other code might suffer this undocumented endless loop as well.
> And again, this is more a nitpicking comment than a real requirement.
> 
> > But we can add something like
> >    /* something has gone wrong if we reach here, so we may as well stay
> >     * here */
> > 
> > What do you think? Could you amend the patch?  
> 
> More something like this:
> 
>       /* Loop while waiting for the reset */
>       while (1)
>               ;

As of now I don't see a need for v4.

I may sent another patches regarding DDR training, but it will be
made on top of this series.

Marek

Reply via email to