Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 1 Mar 2007 09:09:57 -0500 | From | "Mike Frysinger" <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH -mm 5/5] Blackfin: on-chip RTC controller driver |
| |
On 3/1/07, Paul Mundt <lethal@linux-sh.org> wrote: > On Thu, Mar 01, 2007 at 12:15:46PM +0800, Wu, Bryan wrote: > > +#define stamp(fmt, args...) pr_debug("%s:%i: " fmt "\n", __FUNCTION__, __LINE__, ## args) > > +#define stampit() stamp("here i am") > > Are these really necessary for the final driver? It's littered all over > the place, and presumably the driver should be functional enough to not > need this sort of debugging instrumentation.
is there really such a thing as a "final driver" ? :)
keeping the stampit()'s in place means i dont have to re-add and re-delete them every time some one reports a bug ...
> > +static void rtc_bfin_sync_pending(void) > > +{ > > + stampit(); > > + while (!(bfin_read_RTC_ISTAT() & RTC_ISTAT_WRITE_COMPLETE)) { > > + if (!(bfin_read_RTC_ISTAT() & RTC_ISTAT_WRITE_PENDING)) > > + break; > > + } > > + bfin_write_RTC_ISTAT(RTC_ISTAT_WRITE_COMPLETE); > > +} > > No timeout? (and superfluous braces)
the ISTAT is reset every clock tick by the hardware itself ... so the timeout is implicit
> > + case RTC_PIE_ON: > > + stampit(); > > + spin_lock_irq(&rtc->lock); > > + rtc_bfin_sync_pending(); > > And it's also called under a spinlock each time.. this is a disaster > waiting to happen.
i noted the logic behind this decision in the comments in the driver ... i too think it sucks, but i cant fathom a better idea so i'm certainly open to suggestions :) -mike - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |