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
