lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Feb]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [PATCH 04/18] ARM: at91: make ST (System Timer) soc independent
    On 14:16 Mon 20 Feb     , Ryan Mallon wrote:
    > On 20/02/12 14:02, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:
    >
    > > On 12:52 Mon 20 Feb , Ryan Mallon wrote:
    > >> On 20/02/12 12:38, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:
    > >>
    > >>> On 11:22 Mon 20 Feb , Ryan Mallon wrote:
    > >>>> On 18/02/12 04:49, Nicolas Ferre wrote:
    > >>>>
    > >>>>> From: Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD <plagnioj@jcrosoft.com>
    > >>>>>
    > >>>>> Signed-off-by: Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD <plagnioj@jcrosoft.com>
    > >>>>> Acked-by: Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@atmel.com>
    > >>>>> ---
    > >>>>> arch/arm/mach-at91/at91rm9200.c | 4 +-
    > >>>>> arch/arm/mach-at91/at91rm9200_time.c | 37 ++++++++++++++++----------
    > >>>>> arch/arm/mach-at91/generic.h | 1 +
    > >>>>> arch/arm/mach-at91/include/mach/at91_st.h | 32 +++++++++++++++-------
    > >>>>> arch/arm/mach-at91/include/mach/at91rm9200.h | 2 +-
    > >>>>> drivers/watchdog/at91rm9200_wdt.c | 8 +++---
    > >>>>> 6 files changed, 53 insertions(+), 31 deletions(-)
    > >>>>>
    > >>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-at91/at91rm9200.c b/arch/arm/mach-at91/at91rm9200.c
    > >>>>
    > >>>> Hi Jean, Nicolas,
    > >>>>
    > >>>> Patch looks mostly good, couple of points below.
    > >>>>
    > >>>> ~Ryan
    > >>>>
    > >>>> <snip>
    > >>>>
    > >>>>> /* Cancel any pending alarm; flush any pending IRQ */
    > >>>>> - at91_sys_write(AT91_ST_RTAR, alm);
    > >>>>> - (void) at91_sys_read(AT91_ST_SR);
    > >>>>> + at91_st_write(AT91_ST_RTAR, alm);
    > >>>>> + (void) at91_st_read(AT91_ST_SR);
    > >>>>
    > >>>>
    > >>>> Can we please remove the (void) casting of the return value when making
    > >>>> this change, especially since at91_st_read is now a macro which doesn't
    > >>>> even have a return value. Same in a few other places.
    > >>> modification done by script and it's no the scope of this patch
    > >>
    > >>
    > >> That isn't an excuse to leave incorrect code there. It is a simple fix.
    > > no (void) in c means you don't care of the return so basically it's right
    >
    >
    > Because of the way the __raw_writel is defined you are casting the
    > result of an assignment, basically you are doing this:
    >
    > int foo, bar;
    >
    > (void)(foo = bar);
    >
    > Which is pointless. Don't make excuses for silly, redundant code. Fix
    > it, please.
    except it's a read it has nothing to do with that

    Best Regards,
    J.


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2012-02-20 04:33    [W:0.029 / U:29.308 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site