Messages in this thread | | | From | Fu Wei <> | Date | Mon, 25 Jul 2016 23:55:49 +0800 | Subject | Re: [PATCH v9 4/9] clocksource/drivers/arm_arch_timer: use readq to get 64-bit CNTVCT |
| |
Hi Will,
On 25 July 2016 at 23:31, Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com> wrote: > On Mon, Jul 25, 2016 at 11:27:02PM +0800, fu.wei@linaro.org wrote: >> From: Fu Wei <fu.wei@linaro.org> >> >> This patch simplify arch_counter_get_cntvct_mem function by >> using readq to get 64-bit CNTVCT value instead of readl_relaxed. >> >> Signed-off-by: Fu Wei <fu.wei@linaro.org> >> --- >> drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c | 10 +--------- >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 9 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c b/drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c >> index e6fd42d..483d2f9 100644 >> --- a/drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c >> +++ b/drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c >> @@ -418,15 +418,7 @@ u32 arch_timer_get_rate(void) >> >> static u64 arch_counter_get_cntvct_mem(void) >> { >> - u32 vct_lo, vct_hi, tmp_hi; >> - >> - do { >> - vct_hi = readl_relaxed(arch_counter_base + CNTVCT_HI); >> - vct_lo = readl_relaxed(arch_counter_base + CNTVCT_LO); >> - tmp_hi = readl_relaxed(arch_counter_base + CNTVCT_HI); >> - } while (vct_hi != tmp_hi); >> - >> - return ((u64) vct_hi << 32) | vct_lo; >> + return readq(arch_counter_base + CNTVCT_LO); > > Please drop this patch. It doesn't work.
I am OK to drop this, but could you let me know why it doesn't work?
I did get some problem on Foundation model about readq, but it works on Seattle. I guess that is a problem of model, but not a code problem. So I just got confused, why readq doesn't work, :-)
> > http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2016-July/445369.html
I just replied to it, sorry.
> > Will
-- Best regards,
Fu Wei Software Engineer Red Hat
| |