Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 5 Jun 2012 11:13:49 -0500 | From | Scott Wood <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v5 3/5] powerpc/85xx: add sleep and deep sleep support |
| |
On 06/05/2012 06:35 AM, Zhao Chenhui wrote: > On Mon, Jun 04, 2012 at 05:58:38PM -0500, Scott Wood wrote: >> On 06/04/2012 06:12 AM, Zhao Chenhui wrote: >>> On Fri, Jun 01, 2012 at 04:54:35PM -0500, Scott Wood wrote: >>>> On 05/11/2012 06:53 AM, Zhao Chenhui wrote: >>>>> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/cacheflush.h b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/cacheflush.h >>>>> index 94ec20a..baa000c 100644 >>>>> --- a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/cacheflush.h >>>>> +++ b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/cacheflush.h >>>>> @@ -33,6 +33,11 @@ extern void flush_dcache_page(struct page *page); >>>>> #if defined(CONFIG_FSL_BOOKE) || defined(CONFIG_6xx) >>>>> extern void __flush_disable_L1(void); >>>>> #endif >>>>> +#if defined(CONFIG_FSL_BOOKE) >>>>> +extern void flush_dcache_L1(void); >>>>> +#else >>>>> +#define flush_dcache_L1() do { } while (0) >>>>> +#endif >>>> >>>> It doesn't seem right to no-op this on other platforms. >>> >>> The pmc_suspend_enter() in fsl_pmc.c used by mpc85xx and mpc86xx, >>> but flush_dcache_L1() have no definition in mpc86xx platform. >>> I will write flush_dcache_L1() for mpc86xx platform. >> >> How about only calling the function when it's needed? If we didn't need >> an L1 flush here on 86xx before, why do we need it now? > > How about using CONFIG_PPC_85xx to gard it, like this. > > case PM_SUSPEND_STANDBY: > local_irq_disable(); > #ifdef CONFIG_PPC_85xx > flush_dcache_L1(); > #endif > setbits32(&pmc_regs->powmgtcsr, POWMGTCSR_SLP);
We don't support building 85xx/86xx in the same kernel and likely never will, so this is OK.
>>>> Can we introduce a symbol that specifically means pre-e500mc e500, >>>> rather than using negative logic? >>>> >>>> I think something like CONFIG_PPC_E500_V1_V2 has been proposed before. >>> >>> Agree. But CONFIG_PPC_E500_V1_V2 haven't been merged. >> >> Has the concept been NACKed, or just forgotten? If the latter, you >> could include it in this patchset. >> >> -Scott > > In patchwork, it's state is "Superseded". > http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/124284/
I still think there's value in adding such a symbol.
-Scott
| |