lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2017]   [Mar]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH v21 01/13] clocksource: arm_arch_timer: introduce two functions to get the frequency from mmio and sysreg.
Hi Mark,

On 20 March 2017 at 15:36, Fu Wei <fu.wei@linaro.org> wrote:
> Hi Mark,
>
> On 18 March 2017 at 02:05, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Feb 07, 2017 at 02:50:03AM +0800, fu.wei@linaro.org wrote:
>>> +static u32 arch_timer_get_sysreg_freq(void)
>>> +{
>>> + /*
>>> + * Try to get the frequency from the CNTFRQ of sysreg.
>>> + */
>>> + return arch_timer_get_cntfrq();
>>> +}
>>
>> We already have arch_timer_get_cntfrq(), so I don't see the point in
>> this wrapper.
>>
>>> +static u32 arch_timer_get_mmio_freq(void __iomem *cntbase)
>>> +{
>>> + /*
>>> + * Try to get the frequency from the CNTFRQ of timer frame registers.
>>> + * Note: please verify cntbase in caller.
>>> + */
>>> + return readl_relaxed(cntbase + CNTFRQ);
>>> +}
>>
>> Wrapping the MMIO read makes sense if we're going to do this in more
>> than one place, so I'm happy with this wrapper.
>>
>> If you can s/arch_timer_get_mmio_freq/arch_timer_get_cntfrq/, and drop
>
> sorry, May I guess that is
> "s/arch_timer_get_mmio_freq/arch_timer_get_mmio_cntfrq/"
> or
> "s/arch_timer_get_mmio_freq/arch_timer_mem_get_cntfrq/"
>
> which one do you prefer? :-)

keeping using arch_timer_get_cntfrq(); for per-CPU arch timer, then

+static u32 arch_timer_mem_get_cntfrq(void __iomem *cntbase)
+{
+ return readl_relaxed(cntbase + CNTFRQ);
+}
+

Is that OK for you?

>
>> the comments, then this looks fine to me.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Mark.
>
>
>
> --
> Best regards,
>
> Fu Wei
> Software Engineer
> Red Hat



--
Best regards,

Fu Wei
Software Engineer
Red Hat

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2017-03-20 10:48    [W:0.100 / U:38.780 seconds]
©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site