Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 2 Nov 2016 15:26:58 -0700 | From | Stephen Boyd <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v2 5/5] clk: pxa: transfer CPU clock setting from pxa2xx-cpufreq |
| |
On 11/02, Robert Jarzmik wrote: > Stephen Boyd <sboyd@codeaurora.org> writes: > > > On 10/23, Robert Jarzmik wrote: > >> diff --git a/drivers/clk/pxa/clk-pxa.c b/drivers/clk/pxa/clk-pxa.c > >> index 29cee9e8d4d9..7184819b7415 100644 > >> --- a/drivers/clk/pxa/clk-pxa.c > >> +++ b/drivers/clk/pxa/clk-pxa.c > >> +void pxa2xx_core_turbo_switch(bool on) > >> +{ > >> + unsigned long flags; > >> + unsigned int unused, clkcfg; > >> + > >> + local_irq_save(flags); > >> + > >> + asm("mrc\tp14, 0, %0, c6, c0, 0" : "=r" (clkcfg)); > > > > \t is odd style, but I guess this is copied from somewhere? > Yeah ... and yes, that \t is indeed ugly now I look at it. A space could be more > welcome ... > > > Should it be volatile? Or is it ok for the clkcfg value to be > > cached here? > > I don't see how it could be cached ... The asm statement produces a result used > afterwards, I don't think the compiler can optimize that out. I would have > understood if this was in a loop, but here I don't see. > > Note that I'm not reluctant to add it, I just want to check which optimization > case we're talking about to see if I'm missing something. >
I'm a bit rusty on asm volatile semantics but I seem to recall that a non-volatile asm statement can be combined/merged, reordered, etc. by the compiler. I suppose if this was in the cpufreq driver already then changing it in this patch is not a good idea. If anything, a follow up patch if we determine it's actually a bug.
-- Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project
| |