Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 17 Sep 2015 18:19:28 +0800 | From | Caesar Wang <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 1/3] clocksource: rockchip: Make the driver more readability and compatible |
| |
在 2015年09月17日 18:06, Daniel Lezcano 写道: > On 09/17/2015 11:28 AM, Caesar Wang wrote: >> Hi Daniel, >> >> >> 在 2015年09月17日 17:11, Daniel Lezcano 写道: >>> >>> Hi Caesar, >>> >>> >>> On 09/17/2015 09:51 AM, Caesar Wang wrote: >>>> Build the arm64 SoCs (e.g.: RK3368) on Rockchip platform, >>>> There are some failure with build up on timer driver for rockchip. >>>> >>>> logs: >>>> ... >>>> drivers/clocksource/rockchip_timer.c:156:13: error: 'NO_IRQ' >>>> undeclared >>> >>> I think the NO_IRQ definition is missing for ARM64. >> >> Yep, Maybe better to compatible if we don't use the 'NO_IRQ', > > Hmm, after digging into drivers/of/irq.c and kernel/irq/irqdomain.c > > when there is an error it returns zero. So NO_IRQ and -1 are not > correct and on the other side zero can be a valid irq. That sounds a > little bit fuzzy to me.
I believe the 'NO_IRQ' is better select if 'NO_IRQ' is defined on ARM64 platform.
irq = irq_of_parse_and_map(np, 0);
if (irq == NO_IRQ) ... Also, that's ok if we instead of the 'irq < 0' or '!irq' , right?
> >>>> /tmp/ccdAnNy5.s:47: Error: missing immediate expression at operand >>>> 1 -- >>>> `dsb` >>>> ... >>>> >>>> The problem was different semantics of dsb on btw arm32 and arm64, >>>> Here we can convert the dsb with insteading of dsb(sy). >>> >>> What happens to ARM32 then ? >>> >> >> The dsb() is ok for ARM32, the ARM32/64 are OK if we can convert the >> dsb() to dsb(sy). >> I believe all drivers with 'dsb()' have same issue on ARM64 platform. >> >>>> Meanwhile, I change a bit to make the code more readability for driver >>>> when I check the code style. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Caesar Wang <wxt@rock-chips.com> >>> >>> >> >> > > > > -- > Thanks, > Caesar
| |