[PATCH v2 0/4] Support the timer on RK3368 SoC

[PATCH v2 0/4] Support the timer on RK3368 SoC

[Caesar Wang]

Timer0~11 count up from zero to a programmed value and
generate an interrupt when the count reaches the programmed value.

TIMER0, TIMER1, TIMER2, Timer3, TIMER4 and TIMER5 are in the CPU
subsystem, using timer ch0 ~ ch5 respectively. The timer clock is 24MHz
OSC.

This series are found on RK3368 SoC, verified on rk3368 evb board.


Changes in v2:
- As Heiko/Daniel comments, let's split it into two patch.

Changes in v1:
- As Russell, Thomas, Daniel comments, let's replace NO_IRQ by '!irq'.
- As the Heiko comments, add the "rockchip,rk3368-timer" for timer.
  Although the 'rockchip,rk3288-timer' is working for RK3368, need to add the
  'rockchip,rk3368-timer' for the rk3368-spec timer in the future.

Caesar Wang (4):
  clocksource: rockchip: Make the driver more compatible
  clocksource: rockchip: trivial: Make the driver more readability
  arm64: Enable the timer on Rockchip architecture
  arm64: dts: rockchip: Add the needed timer for RK3368 SoC

 arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms             |  1 +
 arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3368.dtsi |  6 ++++++
 drivers/clocksource/rockchip_timer.c     | 27 ++++++++++++++-------------
 3 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)

-- 
1.9.1

[PATCH v2 0/4] Support the timer on RK3368 SoC

[Caesar Wang]

Timer0~11 count up from zero to a programmed value and
generate an interrupt when the count reaches the programmed value.

TIMER0, TIMER1, TIMER2, Timer3, TIMER4 and TIMER5 are in the CPU
subsystem, using timer ch0 ~ ch5 respectively. The timer clock is 24MHz
OSC.

This series are found on RK3368 SoC, verified on rk3368 evb board.


Changes in v2:
- As Heiko/Daniel comments, let's split it into two patch.

Changes in v1:
- As Russell, Thomas, Daniel comments, let's replace NO_IRQ by '!irq'.
- As the Heiko comments, add the "rockchip,rk3368-timer" for timer.
  Although the 'rockchip,rk3288-timer' is working for RK3368, need to add the
  'rockchip,rk3368-timer' for the rk3368-spec timer in the future.

Caesar Wang (4):
  clocksource: rockchip: Make the driver more compatible
  clocksource: rockchip: trivial: Make the driver more readability
  arm64: Enable the timer on Rockchip architecture
  arm64: dts: rockchip: Add the needed timer for RK3368 SoC

 arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms             |  1 +
 arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3368.dtsi |  6 ++++++
 drivers/clocksource/rockchip_timer.c     | 27 ++++++++++++++-------------
 3 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)

-- 
1.9.1

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

[PATCH v2 0/4] Support the timer on RK3368 SoC

[Caesar Wang]

Timer0~11 count up from zero to a programmed value and
generate an interrupt when the count reaches the programmed value.

TIMER0, TIMER1, TIMER2, Timer3, TIMER4 and TIMER5 are in the CPU
subsystem, using timer ch0 ~ ch5 respectively. The timer clock is 24MHz
OSC.

This series are found on RK3368 SoC, verified on rk3368 evb board.


Changes in v2:
- As Heiko/Daniel comments, let's split it into two patch.

Changes in v1:
- As Russell, Thomas, Daniel comments, let's replace NO_IRQ by '!irq'.
- As the Heiko comments, add the "rockchip,rk3368-timer" for timer.
  Although the 'rockchip,rk3288-timer' is working for RK3368, need to add the
  'rockchip,rk3368-timer' for the rk3368-spec timer in the future.

Caesar Wang (4):
  clocksource: rockchip: Make the driver more compatible
  clocksource: rockchip: trivial: Make the driver more readability
  arm64: Enable the timer on Rockchip architecture
  arm64: dts: rockchip: Add the needed timer for RK3368 SoC

 arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms             |  1 +
 arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3368.dtsi |  6 ++++++
 drivers/clocksource/rockchip_timer.c     | 27 ++++++++++++++-------------
 3 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)

-- 
1.9.1

[PATCH v2 1/4] clocksource: rockchip: Make the driver more compatible

[Caesar Wang]

Build the arm64 SoCs (e.g.: RK3368) on Rockchip platform,
There are some failure with build up on timer driver for rockchip.

Says:
/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).The "sy" param
is the default which you are allow to omit, so on arm32 dsb()and dsb(sy)
are the same.

Signed-off-by: Caesar Wang <wxt@rock-chips.com>
---

Changes in v2:
- As Heiko/Daniel comments, let's split it into two patch.

Changes in v1:
- As Russell, Thomas, Daniel comments, let's replace NO_IRQ by '!irq'.

 drivers/clocksource/rockchip_timer.c | 8 ++++----
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/clocksource/rockchip_timer.c b/drivers/clocksource/rockchip_timer.c
index bb2c2b0..3ace7ac 100644
--- a/drivers/clocksource/rockchip_timer.c
+++ b/drivers/clocksource/rockchip_timer.c
@@ -49,14 +49,14 @@ static inline void __iomem *rk_base(struct clock_event_device *ce)
 static inline void rk_timer_disable(struct clock_event_device *ce)
 {
 	writel_relaxed(TIMER_DISABLE, rk_base(ce) + TIMER_CONTROL_REG);
-	dsb();
+	dsb(sy);
 }
 
 static inline void rk_timer_enable(struct clock_event_device *ce, u32 flags)
 {
 	writel_relaxed(TIMER_ENABLE | TIMER_INT_UNMASK | flags,
 		       rk_base(ce) + TIMER_CONTROL_REG);
-	dsb();
+	dsb(sy);
 }
 
 static void rk_timer_update_counter(unsigned long cycles,
@@ -64,13 +64,13 @@ static void rk_timer_update_counter(unsigned long cycles,
 {
 	writel_relaxed(cycles, rk_base(ce) + TIMER_LOAD_COUNT0);
 	writel_relaxed(0, rk_base(ce) + TIMER_LOAD_COUNT1);
-	dsb();
+	dsb(sy);
 }
 
 static void rk_timer_interrupt_clear(struct clock_event_device *ce)
 {
 	writel_relaxed(1, rk_base(ce) + TIMER_INT_STATUS);
-	dsb();
+	dsb(sy);
 }
 
 static inline int rk_timer_set_next_event(unsigned long cycles,
-- 
1.9.1

[PATCH v2 1/4] clocksource: rockchip: Make the driver more compatible

[Caesar Wang]

Build the arm64 SoCs (e.g.: RK3368) on Rockchip platform,
There are some failure with build up on timer driver for rockchip.

Says:
/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).The "sy" param
is the default which you are allow to omit, so on arm32 dsb()and dsb(sy)
are the same.

Signed-off-by: Caesar Wang <wxt@rock-chips.com>
---

Changes in v2:
- As Heiko/Daniel comments, let's split it into two patch.

Changes in v1:
- As Russell, Thomas, Daniel comments, let's replace NO_IRQ by '!irq'.

 drivers/clocksource/rockchip_timer.c | 8 ++++----
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/clocksource/rockchip_timer.c b/drivers/clocksource/rockchip_timer.c
index bb2c2b0..3ace7ac 100644
--- a/drivers/clocksource/rockchip_timer.c
+++ b/drivers/clocksource/rockchip_timer.c
@@ -49,14 +49,14 @@ static inline void __iomem *rk_base(struct clock_event_device *ce)
 static inline void rk_timer_disable(struct clock_event_device *ce)
 {
 	writel_relaxed(TIMER_DISABLE, rk_base(ce) + TIMER_CONTROL_REG);
-	dsb();
+	dsb(sy);
 }
 
 static inline void rk_timer_enable(struct clock_event_device *ce, u32 flags)
 {
 	writel_relaxed(TIMER_ENABLE | TIMER_INT_UNMASK | flags,
 		       rk_base(ce) + TIMER_CONTROL_REG);
-	dsb();
+	dsb(sy);
 }
 
 static void rk_timer_update_counter(unsigned long cycles,
@@ -64,13 +64,13 @@ static void rk_timer_update_counter(unsigned long cycles,
 {
 	writel_relaxed(cycles, rk_base(ce) + TIMER_LOAD_COUNT0);
 	writel_relaxed(0, rk_base(ce) + TIMER_LOAD_COUNT1);
-	dsb();
+	dsb(sy);
 }
 
 static void rk_timer_interrupt_clear(struct clock_event_device *ce)
 {
 	writel_relaxed(1, rk_base(ce) + TIMER_INT_STATUS);
-	dsb();
+	dsb(sy);
 }
 
 static inline int rk_timer_set_next_event(unsigned long cycles,
-- 
1.9.1

[PATCH v2 2/4] clocksource: rockchip: trivial: Make the driver more readability

[Caesar Wang]

Let's checkstyle to clean up the macros with such trivial details.

Signed-off-by: Caesar Wang <wxt@rock-chips.com>
---

Changes in v2: None
Changes in v1: None

 drivers/clocksource/rockchip_timer.c | 19 ++++++++++---------
 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/clocksource/rockchip_timer.c b/drivers/clocksource/rockchip_timer.c
index 3ace7ac..9ed662a 100644
--- a/drivers/clocksource/rockchip_timer.c
+++ b/drivers/clocksource/rockchip_timer.c
@@ -17,16 +17,16 @@
 
 #define TIMER_NAME "rk_timer"
 
-#define TIMER_LOAD_COUNT0 0x00
-#define TIMER_LOAD_COUNT1 0x04
-#define TIMER_CONTROL_REG 0x10
-#define TIMER_INT_STATUS 0x18
+#define TIMER_LOAD_COUNT0	0x00
+#define TIMER_LOAD_COUNT1	0x04
+#define TIMER_CONTROL_REG	0x10
+#define TIMER_INT_STATUS	0x18
 
-#define TIMER_DISABLE 0x0
-#define TIMER_ENABLE 0x1
-#define TIMER_MODE_FREE_RUNNING (0 << 1)
-#define TIMER_MODE_USER_DEFINED_COUNT (1 << 1)
-#define TIMER_INT_UNMASK (1 << 2)
+#define TIMER_DISABLE		0x0
+#define TIMER_ENABLE		0x1
+#define TIMER_MODE_FREE_RUNNING			(0 << 1)
+#define TIMER_MODE_USER_DEFINED_COUNT		(1 << 1)
+#define TIMER_INT_UNMASK			(1 << 2)
 
 struct bc_timer {
 	struct clock_event_device ce;
@@ -173,4 +173,5 @@ static void __init rk_timer_init(struct device_node *np)
 
 	clockevents_config_and_register(ce, bc_timer.freq, 1, UINT_MAX);
 }
+
 CLOCKSOURCE_OF_DECLARE(rk_timer, "rockchip,rk3288-timer", rk_timer_init);
-- 
1.9.1

[PATCH v2 2/4] clocksource: rockchip: trivial: Make the driver more readability

[Caesar Wang]

Let's checkstyle to clean up the macros with such trivial details.

Signed-off-by: Caesar Wang <wxt@rock-chips.com>
---

Changes in v2: None
Changes in v1: None

 drivers/clocksource/rockchip_timer.c | 19 ++++++++++---------
 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/clocksource/rockchip_timer.c b/drivers/clocksource/rockchip_timer.c
index 3ace7ac..9ed662a 100644
--- a/drivers/clocksource/rockchip_timer.c
+++ b/drivers/clocksource/rockchip_timer.c
@@ -17,16 +17,16 @@
 
 #define TIMER_NAME "rk_timer"
 
-#define TIMER_LOAD_COUNT0 0x00
-#define TIMER_LOAD_COUNT1 0x04
-#define TIMER_CONTROL_REG 0x10
-#define TIMER_INT_STATUS 0x18
+#define TIMER_LOAD_COUNT0	0x00
+#define TIMER_LOAD_COUNT1	0x04
+#define TIMER_CONTROL_REG	0x10
+#define TIMER_INT_STATUS	0x18
 
-#define TIMER_DISABLE 0x0
-#define TIMER_ENABLE 0x1
-#define TIMER_MODE_FREE_RUNNING (0 << 1)
-#define TIMER_MODE_USER_DEFINED_COUNT (1 << 1)
-#define TIMER_INT_UNMASK (1 << 2)
+#define TIMER_DISABLE		0x0
+#define TIMER_ENABLE		0x1
+#define TIMER_MODE_FREE_RUNNING			(0 << 1)
+#define TIMER_MODE_USER_DEFINED_COUNT		(1 << 1)
+#define TIMER_INT_UNMASK			(1 << 2)
 
 struct bc_timer {
 	struct clock_event_device ce;
@@ -173,4 +173,5 @@ static void __init rk_timer_init(struct device_node *np)
 
 	clockevents_config_and_register(ce, bc_timer.freq, 1, UINT_MAX);
 }
+
 CLOCKSOURCE_OF_DECLARE(rk_timer, "rockchip,rk3288-timer", rk_timer_init);
-- 
1.9.1

[PATCH v2 3/4] arm64: Enable the timer on Rockchip architecture

[Caesar Wang]

On the RK3368 SoC, support the APB timers for rockchip platform.

Signed-off-by: Caesar Wang <wxt@rock-chips.com>
---

Changes in v2: None
Changes in v1: None

 arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms | 1 +
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)

diff --git a/arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms b/arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms
index 23800a1..0dae08d 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms
+++ b/arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms
@@ -57,6 +57,7 @@ config ARCH_ROCKCHIP
 	select ARCH_REQUIRE_GPIOLIB
 	select PINCTRL
 	select PINCTRL_ROCKCHIP
+	select ROCKCHIP_TIMER
 	help
 	  This enables support for the ARMv8 based Rockchip chipsets,
 	  like the RK3368.
-- 
1.9.1

[PATCH v2 3/4] arm64: Enable the timer on Rockchip architecture

[Caesar Wang]

On the RK3368 SoC, support the APB timers for rockchip platform.

Signed-off-by: Caesar Wang <wxt@rock-chips.com>
---

Changes in v2: None
Changes in v1: None

 arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms | 1 +
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)

diff --git a/arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms b/arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms
index 23800a1..0dae08d 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms
+++ b/arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms
@@ -57,6 +57,7 @@ config ARCH_ROCKCHIP
 	select ARCH_REQUIRE_GPIOLIB
 	select PINCTRL
 	select PINCTRL_ROCKCHIP
+	select ROCKCHIP_TIMER
 	help
 	  This enables support for the ARMv8 based Rockchip chipsets,
 	  like the RK3368.
-- 
1.9.1

[PATCH v2 4/4] arm64: dts: rockchip: Add the needed timer for RK3368 SoC

[Caesar Wang]

There is a need of a broadcast timer in this case to ensure proper
wakeup when the cpus are in sleep mode and a timer expires.

Signed-off-by: Caesar Wang <wxt@rock-chips.com>
---

Changes in v2: None
Changes in v1:
- As the Heiko comments, add the "rockchip,rk3368-timer" for timer.
  Although the 'rockchip,rk3288-timer' is working for RK3368, need to add the
  'rockchip,rk3368-timer' for the rk3368-spec timer in the future.

 arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3368.dtsi | 6 ++++++
 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)

diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3368.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3368.dtsi
index a712bea..c4b3870 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3368.dtsi
+++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3368.dtsi
@@ -214,6 +214,12 @@
 			(GIC_CPU_MASK_SIMPLE(8) | IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH)>;
 	};
 
+	timer@ff810000 {
+		compatible = "rockchip,rk3368-timer", "rockchip,rk3288-timer";
+		reg = <0x0 0xff810000 0x0 0x20>;
+		interrupts = <GIC_SPI 66 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>;
+	};
+
 	xin24m: oscillator {
 		compatible = "fixed-clock";
 		clock-frequency = <24000000>;
-- 
1.9.1

[PATCH v2 4/4] arm64: dts: rockchip: Add the needed timer for RK3368 SoC

[Caesar Wang]

There is a need of a broadcast timer in this case to ensure proper
wakeup when the cpus are in sleep mode and a timer expires.

Signed-off-by: Caesar Wang <wxt@rock-chips.com>
---

Changes in v2: None
Changes in v1:
- As the Heiko comments, add the "rockchip,rk3368-timer" for timer.
  Although the 'rockchip,rk3288-timer' is working for RK3368, need to add the
  'rockchip,rk3368-timer' for the rk3368-spec timer in the future.

 arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3368.dtsi | 6 ++++++
 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)

diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3368.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3368.dtsi
index a712bea..c4b3870 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3368.dtsi
+++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3368.dtsi
@@ -214,6 +214,12 @@
 			(GIC_CPU_MASK_SIMPLE(8) | IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH)>;
 	};
 
+	timer at ff810000 {
+		compatible = "rockchip,rk3368-timer", "rockchip,rk3288-timer";
+		reg = <0x0 0xff810000 0x0 0x20>;
+		interrupts = <GIC_SPI 66 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>;
+	};
+
 	xin24m: oscillator {
 		compatible = "fixed-clock";
 		clock-frequency = <24000000>;
-- 
1.9.1

Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] clocksource: rockchip: Make the driver more compatible

[Daniel Lezcano]

On 09/25/2015 04:14 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.
>
> Says:
> /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).The "sy" param
> is the default which you are allow to omit, so on arm32 dsb()and dsb(sy)
> are the same.
>
> Signed-off-by: Caesar Wang <wxt@rock-chips.com>

Acked-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>

-- 
  <http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs

Follow Linaro:  <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro> Facebook |
<http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg> Twitter |
<http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog/> Blog

[PATCH v2 1/4] clocksource: rockchip: Make the driver more compatible

[Daniel Lezcano]

On 09/25/2015 04:14 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.
>
> Says:
> /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).The "sy" param
> is the default which you are allow to omit, so on arm32 dsb()and dsb(sy)
> are the same.
>
> Signed-off-by: Caesar Wang <wxt@rock-chips.com>

Acked-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>

-- 
  <http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org ? Open source software for ARM SoCs

Follow Linaro:  <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro> Facebook |
<http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg> Twitter |
<http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog/> Blog

Re: [PATCH v2 2/4] clocksource: rockchip: trivial: Make the driver more readability

[Daniel Lezcano]

On 09/25/2015 04:14 AM, Caesar Wang wrote:
> Let's checkstyle to clean up the macros with such trivial details.
>
> Signed-off-by: Caesar Wang <wxt@rock-chips.com>
> ---

Acked-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>

-- 
  <http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs

Follow Linaro:  <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro> Facebook |
<http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg> Twitter |
<http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog/> Blog

[PATCH v2 2/4] clocksource: rockchip: trivial: Make the driver more readability

[Daniel Lezcano]

On 09/25/2015 04:14 AM, Caesar Wang wrote:
> Let's checkstyle to clean up the macros with such trivial details.
>
> Signed-off-by: Caesar Wang <wxt@rock-chips.com>
> ---

Acked-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>

-- 
  <http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org ? Open source software for ARM SoCs

Follow Linaro:  <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro> Facebook |
<http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg> Twitter |
<http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog/> Blog

Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] clocksource: rockchip: Make the driver more compatible

[Heiko Stübner]

Hi Daniel,

Am Dienstag, 29. September 2015, 06:18:03 schrieb Daniel Lezcano:
> On 09/25/2015 04:14 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.
> > 
> > Says:
> > /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).The "sy" param
> > is the default which you are allow to omit, so on arm32 dsb()and dsb(sy)
> > are the same.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Caesar Wang <wxt@rock-chips.com>
> 
> Acked-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>

as you have "just" Acked these patches, I guess you are expecting them to go 
through the same tree as the devicetree changes, right?

Thanks
Heiko

[PATCH v2 1/4] clocksource: rockchip: Make the driver more compatible

[Heiko Stübner]

Hi Daniel,

Am Dienstag, 29. September 2015, 06:18:03 schrieb Daniel Lezcano:
> On 09/25/2015 04:14 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.
> > 
> > Says:
> > /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).The "sy" param
> > is the default which you are allow to omit, so on arm32 dsb()and dsb(sy)
> > are the same.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Caesar Wang <wxt@rock-chips.com>
> 
> Acked-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>

as you have "just" Acked these patches, I guess you are expecting them to go 
through the same tree as the devicetree changes, right?

Thanks
Heiko

Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] clocksource: rockchip: Make the driver more compatible

[Caesar Wang]

Hi Daniel,

在 2015年10月01日 03:14, Heiko Stübner 写道:
> Hi Daniel,
>
> Am Dienstag, 29. September 2015, 06:18:03 schrieb Daniel Lezcano:
>> On 09/25/2015 04:14 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.
>>>
>>> Says:
>>> /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).The "sy" param
>>> is the default which you are allow to omit, so on arm32 dsb()and dsb(sy)
>>> are the same.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Caesar Wang <wxt@rock-chips.com>
>> Acked-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>
> as you have "just" Acked these patches, I guess you are expecting them to go
> through the same tree as the devicetree changes, right?

I'm wonder if someone will apply this series patchs but the wait.:-)
In fact, I'm no sure that the Acked is really meaning.:-

>
> Thanks
> Heiko
>
> _______________________________________________
> Linux-rockchip mailing list
> Linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-rockchip


-- 
Thanks,
Caesar

Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] clocksource: rockchip: Make the driver more compatible

[Caesar Wang]

Hi Daniel,

在 2015年10月01日 03:14, Heiko Stübner 写道:
> Hi Daniel,
>
> Am Dienstag, 29. September 2015, 06:18:03 schrieb Daniel Lezcano:
>> On 09/25/2015 04:14 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.
>>>
>>> Says:
>>> /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).The "sy" param
>>> is the default which you are allow to omit, so on arm32 dsb()and dsb(sy)
>>> are the same.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Caesar Wang <wxt@rock-chips.com>
>> Acked-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>
> as you have "just" Acked these patches, I guess you are expecting them to go
> through the same tree as the devicetree changes, right?

I'm wonder if someone will apply this series patchs but the wait.:-)
In fact, I'm no sure that the Acked is really meaning.:-

>
> Thanks
> Heiko
>
> _______________________________________________
> Linux-rockchip mailing list
> Linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-rockchip


-- 
Thanks,
Caesar


_______________________________________________
Linux-rockchip mailing list
Linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-rockchip

[PATCH v2 1/4] clocksource: rockchip: Make the driver more compatible

[Caesar Wang]

Hi Daniel,

? 2015?10?01? 03:14, Heiko St?bner ??:
> Hi Daniel,
>
> Am Dienstag, 29. September 2015, 06:18:03 schrieb Daniel Lezcano:
>> On 09/25/2015 04:14 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.
>>>
>>> Says:
>>> /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).The "sy" param
>>> is the default which you are allow to omit, so on arm32 dsb()and dsb(sy)
>>> are the same.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Caesar Wang <wxt@rock-chips.com>
>> Acked-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>
> as you have "just" Acked these patches, I guess you are expecting them to go
> through the same tree as the devicetree changes, right?

I'm wonder if someone will apply this series patchs but the wait.:-)
In fact, I'm no sure that the Acked is really meaning.:-

>
> Thanks
> Heiko
>
> _______________________________________________
> Linux-rockchip mailing list
> Linux-rockchip at lists.infradead.org
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-rockchip


-- 
Thanks,
Caesar

Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] clocksource: rockchip: Make the driver more compatible

[Daniel Lezcano]

On 10/30/2015 04:43 AM, Caesar Wang wrote:
> Hi Daniel,
>
> 在 2015年10月01日 03:14, Heiko Stübner 写道:
>> Hi Daniel,
>>
>> Am Dienstag, 29. September 2015, 06:18:03 schrieb Daniel Lezcano:
>>> On 09/25/2015 04:14 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.
>>>>
>>>> Says:
>>>> /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).The "sy" param
>>>> is the default which you are allow to omit, so on arm32 dsb()and
>>>> dsb(sy)
>>>> are the same.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Caesar Wang <wxt@rock-chips.com>
>>> Acked-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>
>> as you have "just" Acked these patches, I guess you are expecting them
>> to go
>> through the same tree as the devicetree changes, right?
>
> I'm wonder if someone will apply this series patchs but the wait.:-)
> In fact, I'm no sure that the Acked is really meaning.:-

Yes, by acking the patch I say I am ok with it and I agree it can go 
through another tree.

I suggest before sending patches you read carefully the file 
Documentation/SubmittingPatches.

Especially, 11), 12) and 13).

Thanks.

   -- Daniel


-- 
  <http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs

Follow Linaro:  <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro> Facebook |
<http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg> Twitter |
<http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog/> Blog

[PATCH v2 1/4] clocksource: rockchip: Make the driver more compatible

[Daniel Lezcano]

On 10/30/2015 04:43 AM, Caesar Wang wrote:
> Hi Daniel,
>
> ? 2015?10?01? 03:14, Heiko St?bner ??:
>> Hi Daniel,
>>
>> Am Dienstag, 29. September 2015, 06:18:03 schrieb Daniel Lezcano:
>>> On 09/25/2015 04:14 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.
>>>>
>>>> Says:
>>>> /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).The "sy" param
>>>> is the default which you are allow to omit, so on arm32 dsb()and
>>>> dsb(sy)
>>>> are the same.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Caesar Wang <wxt@rock-chips.com>
>>> Acked-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>
>> as you have "just" Acked these patches, I guess you are expecting them
>> to go
>> through the same tree as the devicetree changes, right?
>
> I'm wonder if someone will apply this series patchs but the wait.:-)
> In fact, I'm no sure that the Acked is really meaning.:-

Yes, by acking the patch I say I am ok with it and I agree it can go 
through another tree.

I suggest before sending patches you read carefully the file 
Documentation/SubmittingPatches.

Especially, 11), 12) and 13).

Thanks.

   -- Daniel


-- 
  <http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org ? Open source software for ARM SoCs

Follow Linaro:  <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro> Facebook |
<http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg> Twitter |
<http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog/> Blog

Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] clocksource: rockchip: Make the driver more compatible

[Heiko Stuebner]

Hi Daniel,

Am Freitag, 30. Oktober 2015, 11:42:29 schrieb Daniel Lezcano:
> On 10/30/2015 04:43 AM, Caesar Wang wrote:
> > Hi Daniel,
> >
> > 在 2015年10月01日 03:14, Heiko Stübner 写道:
> >> Hi Daniel,
> >>
> >> Am Dienstag, 29. September 2015, 06:18:03 schrieb Daniel Lezcano:
> >>> On 09/25/2015 04:14 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.
> >>>>
> >>>> Says:
> >>>> /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).The "sy" param
> >>>> is the default which you are allow to omit, so on arm32 dsb()and
> >>>> dsb(sy)
> >>>> are the same.
> >>>>
> >>>> Signed-off-by: Caesar Wang <wxt@rock-chips.com>
> >>> Acked-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>
> >> as you have "just" Acked these patches, I guess you are expecting them
> >> to go
> >> through the same tree as the devicetree changes, right?
> >
> > I'm wonder if someone will apply this series patchs but the wait.:-)
> > In fact, I'm no sure that the Acked is really meaning.:-
> 
> Yes, by acking the patch I say I am ok with it and I agree it can go 
> through another tree.

although I guess the two clocksource changes could very well just go
through your tree. dsb() -> dsb(sy) is supposed to be equal and the second
one is just cosmetics.  The Kconfig and dts changes need to wait in any case
for 4.5 ... but I guess that may be true for the clocksource changes as well?


Heiko

Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] clocksource: rockchip: Make the driver more compatible

[Heiko Stuebner]

Hi Daniel,

Am Freitag, 30. Oktober 2015, 11:42:29 schrieb Daniel Lezcano:
> On 10/30/2015 04:43 AM, Caesar Wang wrote:
> > Hi Daniel,
> >
> > 在 2015年10月01日 03:14, Heiko Stübner 写道:
> >> Hi Daniel,
> >>
> >> Am Dienstag, 29. September 2015, 06:18:03 schrieb Daniel Lezcano:
> >>> On 09/25/2015 04:14 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.
> >>>>
> >>>> Says:
> >>>> /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).The "sy" param
> >>>> is the default which you are allow to omit, so on arm32 dsb()and
> >>>> dsb(sy)
> >>>> are the same.
> >>>>
> >>>> Signed-off-by: Caesar Wang <wxt@rock-chips.com>
> >>> Acked-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>
> >> as you have "just" Acked these patches, I guess you are expecting them
> >> to go
> >> through the same tree as the devicetree changes, right?
> >
> > I'm wonder if someone will apply this series patchs but the wait.:-)
> > In fact, I'm no sure that the Acked is really meaning.:-
> 
> Yes, by acking the patch I say I am ok with it and I agree it can go 
> through another tree.

although I guess the two clocksource changes could very well just go
through your tree. dsb() -> dsb(sy) is supposed to be equal and the second
one is just cosmetics.  The Kconfig and dts changes need to wait in any case
for 4.5 ... but I guess that may be true for the clocksource changes as well?


Heiko


_______________________________________________
Linux-rockchip mailing list
Linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-rockchip

[PATCH v2 1/4] clocksource: rockchip: Make the driver more compatible

[Heiko Stuebner]

Hi Daniel,

Am Freitag, 30. Oktober 2015, 11:42:29 schrieb Daniel Lezcano:
> On 10/30/2015 04:43 AM, Caesar Wang wrote:
> > Hi Daniel,
> >
> > ? 2015?10?01? 03:14, Heiko St?bner ??:
> >> Hi Daniel,
> >>
> >> Am Dienstag, 29. September 2015, 06:18:03 schrieb Daniel Lezcano:
> >>> On 09/25/2015 04:14 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.
> >>>>
> >>>> Says:
> >>>> /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).The "sy" param
> >>>> is the default which you are allow to omit, so on arm32 dsb()and
> >>>> dsb(sy)
> >>>> are the same.
> >>>>
> >>>> Signed-off-by: Caesar Wang <wxt@rock-chips.com>
> >>> Acked-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>
> >> as you have "just" Acked these patches, I guess you are expecting them
> >> to go
> >> through the same tree as the devicetree changes, right?
> >
> > I'm wonder if someone will apply this series patchs but the wait.:-)
> > In fact, I'm no sure that the Acked is really meaning.:-
> 
> Yes, by acking the patch I say I am ok with it and I agree it can go 
> through another tree.

although I guess the two clocksource changes could very well just go
through your tree. dsb() -> dsb(sy) is supposed to be equal and the second
one is just cosmetics.  The Kconfig and dts changes need to wait in any case
for 4.5 ... but I guess that may be true for the clocksource changes as well?


Heiko

Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] clocksource: rockchip: Make the driver more compatible

[Daniel Lezcano]

On 10/31/2015 12:47 AM, Heiko Stuebner wrote:
> Hi Daniel,
>
> Am Freitag, 30. Oktober 2015, 11:42:29 schrieb Daniel Lezcano:
>> On 10/30/2015 04:43 AM, Caesar Wang wrote:
>>> Hi Daniel,
>>>
>>> 在 2015年10月01日 03:14, Heiko Stübner 写道:
>>>> Hi Daniel,
>>>>
>>>> Am Dienstag, 29. September 2015, 06:18:03 schrieb Daniel Lezcano:
>>>>> On 09/25/2015 04:14 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.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Says:
>>>>>> /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).The "sy" param
>>>>>> is the default which you are allow to omit, so on arm32 dsb()and
>>>>>> dsb(sy)
>>>>>> are the same.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Caesar Wang <wxt@rock-chips.com>
>>>>> Acked-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>
>>>> as you have "just" Acked these patches, I guess you are expecting them
>>>> to go
>>>> through the same tree as the devicetree changes, right?
>>>
>>> I'm wonder if someone will apply this series patchs but the wait.:-)
>>> In fact, I'm no sure that the Acked is really meaning.:-
>>
>> Yes, by acking the patch I say I am ok with it and I agree it can go
>> through another tree.
>
> although I guess the two clocksource changes could very well just go
> through your tree. dsb() -> dsb(sy) is supposed to be equal and the second
> one is just cosmetics.  The Kconfig and dts changes need to wait in any case
> for 4.5 ... but I guess that may be true for the clocksource changes as well?

Ok, I will take the two first patches through my tree.

Thanks
   -- Daniel


-- 
  <http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs

Follow Linaro:  <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro> Facebook |
<http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg> Twitter |
<http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog/> Blog

Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] clocksource: rockchip: Make the driver more compatible

[Daniel Lezcano]

On 10/31/2015 12:47 AM, Heiko Stuebner wrote:
> Hi Daniel,
>
> Am Freitag, 30. Oktober 2015, 11:42:29 schrieb Daniel Lezcano:
>> On 10/30/2015 04:43 AM, Caesar Wang wrote:
>>> Hi Daniel,
>>>
>>> 在 2015年10月01日 03:14, Heiko Stübner 写道:
>>>> Hi Daniel,
>>>>
>>>> Am Dienstag, 29. September 2015, 06:18:03 schrieb Daniel Lezcano:
>>>>> On 09/25/2015 04:14 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.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Says:
>>>>>> /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).The "sy" param
>>>>>> is the default which you are allow to omit, so on arm32 dsb()and
>>>>>> dsb(sy)
>>>>>> are the same.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Caesar Wang <wxt-TNX95d0MmH7DzftRWevZcw@public.gmane.org>
>>>>> Acked-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano-QSEj5FYQhm4dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>
>>>> as you have "just" Acked these patches, I guess you are expecting them
>>>> to go
>>>> through the same tree as the devicetree changes, right?
>>>
>>> I'm wonder if someone will apply this series patchs but the wait.:-)
>>> In fact, I'm no sure that the Acked is really meaning.:-
>>
>> Yes, by acking the patch I say I am ok with it and I agree it can go
>> through another tree.
>
> although I guess the two clocksource changes could very well just go
> through your tree. dsb() -> dsb(sy) is supposed to be equal and the second
> one is just cosmetics.  The Kconfig and dts changes need to wait in any case
> for 4.5 ... but I guess that may be true for the clocksource changes as well?

Ok, I will take the two first patches through my tree.

Thanks
   -- Daniel


-- 
  <http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs

Follow Linaro:  <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro> Facebook |
<http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg> Twitter |
<http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog/> Blog

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

[PATCH v2 1/4] clocksource: rockchip: Make the driver more compatible

[Daniel Lezcano]

On 10/31/2015 12:47 AM, Heiko Stuebner wrote:
> Hi Daniel,
>
> Am Freitag, 30. Oktober 2015, 11:42:29 schrieb Daniel Lezcano:
>> On 10/30/2015 04:43 AM, Caesar Wang wrote:
>>> Hi Daniel,
>>>
>>> ? 2015?10?01? 03:14, Heiko St?bner ??:
>>>> Hi Daniel,
>>>>
>>>> Am Dienstag, 29. September 2015, 06:18:03 schrieb Daniel Lezcano:
>>>>> On 09/25/2015 04:14 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.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Says:
>>>>>> /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).The "sy" param
>>>>>> is the default which you are allow to omit, so on arm32 dsb()and
>>>>>> dsb(sy)
>>>>>> are the same.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Caesar Wang <wxt@rock-chips.com>
>>>>> Acked-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>
>>>> as you have "just" Acked these patches, I guess you are expecting them
>>>> to go
>>>> through the same tree as the devicetree changes, right?
>>>
>>> I'm wonder if someone will apply this series patchs but the wait.:-)
>>> In fact, I'm no sure that the Acked is really meaning.:-
>>
>> Yes, by acking the patch I say I am ok with it and I agree it can go
>> through another tree.
>
> although I guess the two clocksource changes could very well just go
> through your tree. dsb() -> dsb(sy) is supposed to be equal and the second
> one is just cosmetics.  The Kconfig and dts changes need to wait in any case
> for 4.5 ... but I guess that may be true for the clocksource changes as well?

Ok, I will take the two first patches through my tree.

Thanks
   -- Daniel


-- 
  <http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org ? Open source software for ARM SoCs

Follow Linaro:  <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro> Facebook |
<http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg> Twitter |
<http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog/> Blog

Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] clocksource: rockchip: Make the driver more compatible

[Daniel Lezcano]

On 10/31/2015 12:47 AM, Heiko Stuebner wrote:
> Hi Daniel,
>
> Am Freitag, 30. Oktober 2015, 11:42:29 schrieb Daniel Lezcano:
>> On 10/30/2015 04:43 AM, Caesar Wang wrote:
>>> Hi Daniel,
>>>
>>> 在 2015年10月01日 03:14, Heiko Stübner 写道:
>>>> Hi Daniel,
>>>>
>>>> Am Dienstag, 29. September 2015, 06:18:03 schrieb Daniel Lezcano:
>>>>> On 09/25/2015 04:14 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.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Says:
>>>>>> /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).The "sy" param
>>>>>> is the default which you are allow to omit, so on arm32 dsb()and
>>>>>> dsb(sy)
>>>>>> are the same.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Caesar Wang <wxt@rock-chips.com>
>>>>> Acked-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>
>>>> as you have "just" Acked these patches, I guess you are expecting them
>>>> to go
>>>> through the same tree as the devicetree changes, right?
>>>
>>> I'm wonder if someone will apply this series patchs but the wait.:-)
>>> In fact, I'm no sure that the Acked is really meaning.:-
>>
>> Yes, by acking the patch I say I am ok with it and I agree it can go
>> through another tree.
>
> although I guess the two clocksource changes could very well just go
> through your tree. dsb() -> dsb(sy) is supposed to be equal and the second
> one is just cosmetics.  The Kconfig and dts changes need to wait in any case
> for 4.5 ... but I guess that may be true for the clocksource changes as well?

Heiko, Caesar,

I am wondering if the dsb() is really necessary. Is it possible you test 
the timer by removing this instruction ? Otherwise I will have to setup 
my board again and it will take awhile.


-- 
  <http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs

Follow Linaro:  <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro> Facebook |
<http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg> Twitter |
<http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog/> Blog

Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] clocksource: rockchip: Make the driver more compatible

[Daniel Lezcano]

On 10/31/2015 12:47 AM, Heiko Stuebner wrote:
> Hi Daniel,
>
> Am Freitag, 30. Oktober 2015, 11:42:29 schrieb Daniel Lezcano:
>> On 10/30/2015 04:43 AM, Caesar Wang wrote:
>>> Hi Daniel,
>>>
>>> 在 2015年10月01日 03:14, Heiko Stübner 写道:
>>>> Hi Daniel,
>>>>
>>>> Am Dienstag, 29. September 2015, 06:18:03 schrieb Daniel Lezcano:
>>>>> On 09/25/2015 04:14 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.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Says:
>>>>>> /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).The "sy" param
>>>>>> is the default which you are allow to omit, so on arm32 dsb()and
>>>>>> dsb(sy)
>>>>>> are the same.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Caesar Wang <wxt-TNX95d0MmH7DzftRWevZcw@public.gmane.org>
>>>>> Acked-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano-QSEj5FYQhm4dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>
>>>> as you have "just" Acked these patches, I guess you are expecting them
>>>> to go
>>>> through the same tree as the devicetree changes, right?
>>>
>>> I'm wonder if someone will apply this series patchs but the wait.:-)
>>> In fact, I'm no sure that the Acked is really meaning.:-
>>
>> Yes, by acking the patch I say I am ok with it and I agree it can go
>> through another tree.
>
> although I guess the two clocksource changes could very well just go
> through your tree. dsb() -> dsb(sy) is supposed to be equal and the second
> one is just cosmetics.  The Kconfig and dts changes need to wait in any case
> for 4.5 ... but I guess that may be true for the clocksource changes as well?

Heiko, Caesar,

I am wondering if the dsb() is really necessary. Is it possible you test 
the timer by removing this instruction ? Otherwise I will have to setup 
my board again and it will take awhile.


-- 
  <http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs

Follow Linaro:  <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro> Facebook |
<http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg> Twitter |
<http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog/> Blog

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

[PATCH v2 1/4] clocksource: rockchip: Make the driver more compatible

[Daniel Lezcano]

On 10/31/2015 12:47 AM, Heiko Stuebner wrote:
> Hi Daniel,
>
> Am Freitag, 30. Oktober 2015, 11:42:29 schrieb Daniel Lezcano:
>> On 10/30/2015 04:43 AM, Caesar Wang wrote:
>>> Hi Daniel,
>>>
>>> ? 2015?10?01? 03:14, Heiko St?bner ??:
>>>> Hi Daniel,
>>>>
>>>> Am Dienstag, 29. September 2015, 06:18:03 schrieb Daniel Lezcano:
>>>>> On 09/25/2015 04:14 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.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Says:
>>>>>> /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).The "sy" param
>>>>>> is the default which you are allow to omit, so on arm32 dsb()and
>>>>>> dsb(sy)
>>>>>> are the same.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Caesar Wang <wxt@rock-chips.com>
>>>>> Acked-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>
>>>> as you have "just" Acked these patches, I guess you are expecting them
>>>> to go
>>>> through the same tree as the devicetree changes, right?
>>>
>>> I'm wonder if someone will apply this series patchs but the wait.:-)
>>> In fact, I'm no sure that the Acked is really meaning.:-
>>
>> Yes, by acking the patch I say I am ok with it and I agree it can go
>> through another tree.
>
> although I guess the two clocksource changes could very well just go
> through your tree. dsb() -> dsb(sy) is supposed to be equal and the second
> one is just cosmetics.  The Kconfig and dts changes need to wait in any case
> for 4.5 ... but I guess that may be true for the clocksource changes as well?

Heiko, Caesar,

I am wondering if the dsb() is really necessary. Is it possible you test 
the timer by removing this instruction ? Otherwise I will have to setup 
my board again and it will take awhile.


-- 
  <http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org ? Open source software for ARM SoCs

Follow Linaro:  <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro> Facebook |
<http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg> Twitter |
<http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog/> Blog

Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] clocksource: rockchip: Make the driver more compatible

[Caesar Wang]

Daniel,

在 2015年11月03日 01:28, Daniel Lezcano 写道:
> On 10/31/2015 12:47 AM, Heiko Stuebner wrote:
>> Hi Daniel,
>>
>> Am Freitag, 30. Oktober 2015, 11:42:29 schrieb Daniel Lezcano:
>>> On 10/30/2015 04:43 AM, Caesar Wang wrote:
>>>> Hi Daniel,
>>>>
>>>> 在 2015年10月01日 03:14, Heiko Stübner 写道:
>>>>> Hi Daniel,
>>>>>
>>>>> Am Dienstag, 29. September 2015, 06:18:03 schrieb Daniel Lezcano:
>>>>>> On 09/25/2015 04:14 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.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Says:
>>>>>>> /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).The "sy" 
>>>>>>> param
>>>>>>> is the default which you are allow to omit, so on arm32 dsb()and
>>>>>>> dsb(sy)
>>>>>>> are the same.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Caesar Wang <wxt@rock-chips.com>
>>>>>> Acked-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>
>>>>> as you have "just" Acked these patches, I guess you are expecting 
>>>>> them
>>>>> to go
>>>>> through the same tree as the devicetree changes, right?
>>>>
>>>> I'm wonder if someone will apply this series patchs but the wait.:-)
>>>> In fact, I'm no sure that the Acked is really meaning.:-
>>>
>>> Yes, by acking the patch I say I am ok with it and I agree it can go
>>> through another tree.
>>
>> although I guess the two clocksource changes could very well just go
>> through your tree. dsb() -> dsb(sy) is supposed to be equal and the 
>> second
>> one is just cosmetics.  The Kconfig and dts changes need to wait in 
>> any case
>> for 4.5 ... but I guess that may be true for the clocksource changes 
>> as well?
>
> Heiko, Caesar,
>
> I am wondering if the dsb() is really necessary. Is it possible you 
> test the timer by removing this instruction ? Otherwise I will have to 
> setup my board again and it will take awhile.
>

As the @Arnd suggestion,

That's seem ok for me.
Although the writel_relaxed() and writel() a bit different  with DSB() 
and L2's sync.

Do I need send the patch v3?  I will test that on my board.

I'm no sure that why the clocksource driver didn't use the 
writel_relaxed() to work.
Okay, I think we should according to the suggestion or required.

-- 
Thanks,
Caesar

Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] clocksource: rockchip: Make the driver more compatible

[Caesar Wang]

Daniel,

在 2015年11月03日 01:28, Daniel Lezcano 写道:
> On 10/31/2015 12:47 AM, Heiko Stuebner wrote:
>> Hi Daniel,
>>
>> Am Freitag, 30. Oktober 2015, 11:42:29 schrieb Daniel Lezcano:
>>> On 10/30/2015 04:43 AM, Caesar Wang wrote:
>>>> Hi Daniel,
>>>>
>>>> 在 2015年10月01日 03:14, Heiko Stübner 写道:
>>>>> Hi Daniel,
>>>>>
>>>>> Am Dienstag, 29. September 2015, 06:18:03 schrieb Daniel Lezcano:
>>>>>> On 09/25/2015 04:14 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.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Says:
>>>>>>> /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).The "sy" 
>>>>>>> param
>>>>>>> is the default which you are allow to omit, so on arm32 dsb()and
>>>>>>> dsb(sy)
>>>>>>> are the same.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Caesar Wang <wxt-TNX95d0MmH7DzftRWevZcw@public.gmane.org>
>>>>>> Acked-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano-QSEj5FYQhm4dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>
>>>>> as you have "just" Acked these patches, I guess you are expecting 
>>>>> them
>>>>> to go
>>>>> through the same tree as the devicetree changes, right?
>>>>
>>>> I'm wonder if someone will apply this series patchs but the wait.:-)
>>>> In fact, I'm no sure that the Acked is really meaning.:-
>>>
>>> Yes, by acking the patch I say I am ok with it and I agree it can go
>>> through another tree.
>>
>> although I guess the two clocksource changes could very well just go
>> through your tree. dsb() -> dsb(sy) is supposed to be equal and the 
>> second
>> one is just cosmetics.  The Kconfig and dts changes need to wait in 
>> any case
>> for 4.5 ... but I guess that may be true for the clocksource changes 
>> as well?
>
> Heiko, Caesar,
>
> I am wondering if the dsb() is really necessary. Is it possible you 
> test the timer by removing this instruction ? Otherwise I will have to 
> setup my board again and it will take awhile.
>

As the @Arnd suggestion,

That's seem ok for me.
Although the writel_relaxed() and writel() a bit different  with DSB() 
and L2's sync.

Do I need send the patch v3?  I will test that on my board.

I'm no sure that why the clocksource driver didn't use the 
writel_relaxed() to work.
Okay, I think we should according to the suggestion or required.

-- 
Thanks,
Caesar

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

[PATCH v2 1/4] clocksource: rockchip: Make the driver more compatible

[Caesar Wang]

Daniel,

? 2015?11?03? 01:28, Daniel Lezcano ??:
> On 10/31/2015 12:47 AM, Heiko Stuebner wrote:
>> Hi Daniel,
>>
>> Am Freitag, 30. Oktober 2015, 11:42:29 schrieb Daniel Lezcano:
>>> On 10/30/2015 04:43 AM, Caesar Wang wrote:
>>>> Hi Daniel,
>>>>
>>>> ? 2015?10?01? 03:14, Heiko St?bner ??:
>>>>> Hi Daniel,
>>>>>
>>>>> Am Dienstag, 29. September 2015, 06:18:03 schrieb Daniel Lezcano:
>>>>>> On 09/25/2015 04:14 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.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Says:
>>>>>>> /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).The "sy" 
>>>>>>> param
>>>>>>> is the default which you are allow to omit, so on arm32 dsb()and
>>>>>>> dsb(sy)
>>>>>>> are the same.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Caesar Wang <wxt@rock-chips.com>
>>>>>> Acked-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>
>>>>> as you have "just" Acked these patches, I guess you are expecting 
>>>>> them
>>>>> to go
>>>>> through the same tree as the devicetree changes, right?
>>>>
>>>> I'm wonder if someone will apply this series patchs but the wait.:-)
>>>> In fact, I'm no sure that the Acked is really meaning.:-
>>>
>>> Yes, by acking the patch I say I am ok with it and I agree it can go
>>> through another tree.
>>
>> although I guess the two clocksource changes could very well just go
>> through your tree. dsb() -> dsb(sy) is supposed to be equal and the 
>> second
>> one is just cosmetics.  The Kconfig and dts changes need to wait in 
>> any case
>> for 4.5 ... but I guess that may be true for the clocksource changes 
>> as well?
>
> Heiko, Caesar,
>
> I am wondering if the dsb() is really necessary. Is it possible you 
> test the timer by removing this instruction ? Otherwise I will have to 
> setup my board again and it will take awhile.
>

As the @Arnd suggestion,

That's seem ok for me.
Although the writel_relaxed() and writel() a bit different  with DSB() 
and L2's sync.

Do I need send the patch v3?  I will test that on my board.

I'm no sure that why the clocksource driver didn't use the 
writel_relaxed() to work.
Okay, I think we should according to the suggestion or required.

-- 
Thanks,
Caesar

Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] clocksource: rockchip: Make the driver more compatible

[Daniel Lezcano]

On 11/03/2015 03:00 AM, Caesar Wang wrote:
> Daniel,
>
> 在 2015年11月03日 01:28, Daniel Lezcano 写道:
>> On 10/31/2015 12:47 AM, Heiko Stuebner wrote:
>>> Hi Daniel,
>>>
>>> Am Freitag, 30. Oktober 2015, 11:42:29 schrieb Daniel Lezcano:
>>>> On 10/30/2015 04:43 AM, Caesar Wang wrote:
>>>>> Hi Daniel,
>>>>>
>>>>> 在 2015年10月01日 03:14, Heiko Stübner 写道:
>>>>>> Hi Daniel,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Am Dienstag, 29. September 2015, 06:18:03 schrieb Daniel Lezcano:
>>>>>>> On 09/25/2015 04:14 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.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Says:
>>>>>>>> /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).The "sy"
>>>>>>>> param
>>>>>>>> is the default which you are allow to omit, so on arm32 dsb()and
>>>>>>>> dsb(sy)
>>>>>>>> are the same.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Caesar Wang <wxt@rock-chips.com>
>>>>>>> Acked-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>
>>>>>> as you have "just" Acked these patches, I guess you are expecting
>>>>>> them
>>>>>> to go
>>>>>> through the same tree as the devicetree changes, right?
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm wonder if someone will apply this series patchs but the wait.:-)
>>>>> In fact, I'm no sure that the Acked is really meaning.:-
>>>>
>>>> Yes, by acking the patch I say I am ok with it and I agree it can go
>>>> through another tree.
>>>
>>> although I guess the two clocksource changes could very well just go
>>> through your tree. dsb() -> dsb(sy) is supposed to be equal and the
>>> second
>>> one is just cosmetics.  The Kconfig and dts changes need to wait in
>>> any case
>>> for 4.5 ... but I guess that may be true for the clocksource changes
>>> as well?
>>
>> Heiko, Caesar,
>>
>> I am wondering if the dsb() is really necessary. Is it possible you
>> test the timer by removing this instruction ? Otherwise I will have to
>> setup my board again and it will take awhile.
>>
>
> As the @Arnd suggestion,
>
> That's seem ok for me.
> Although the writel_relaxed() and writel() a bit different  with DSB()
> and L2's sync.
>
> Do I need send the patch v3?  I will test that on my board.
>
> I'm no sure that why the clocksource driver didn't use the
> writel_relaxed() to work.
> Okay, I think we should according to the suggestion or required.

I think the patch is trivial enough I can do the change myself if you 
test the change on your side. But it would be a good practice to send 
the patch you have tested. Up to you ;)

Thanks !

   -- Daniel


-- 
  <http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs

Follow Linaro:  <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro> Facebook |
<http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg> Twitter |
<http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog/> Blog

Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] clocksource: rockchip: Make the driver more compatible

[Daniel Lezcano]

On 11/03/2015 03:00 AM, Caesar Wang wrote:
> Daniel,
>
> 在 2015年11月03日 01:28, Daniel Lezcano 写道:
>> On 10/31/2015 12:47 AM, Heiko Stuebner wrote:
>>> Hi Daniel,
>>>
>>> Am Freitag, 30. Oktober 2015, 11:42:29 schrieb Daniel Lezcano:
>>>> On 10/30/2015 04:43 AM, Caesar Wang wrote:
>>>>> Hi Daniel,
>>>>>
>>>>> 在 2015年10月01日 03:14, Heiko Stübner 写道:
>>>>>> Hi Daniel,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Am Dienstag, 29. September 2015, 06:18:03 schrieb Daniel Lezcano:
>>>>>>> On 09/25/2015 04:14 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.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Says:
>>>>>>>> /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).The "sy"
>>>>>>>> param
>>>>>>>> is the default which you are allow to omit, so on arm32 dsb()and
>>>>>>>> dsb(sy)
>>>>>>>> are the same.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Caesar Wang <wxt@rock-chips.com>
>>>>>>> Acked-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>
>>>>>> as you have "just" Acked these patches, I guess you are expecting
>>>>>> them
>>>>>> to go
>>>>>> through the same tree as the devicetree changes, right?
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm wonder if someone will apply this series patchs but the wait.:-)
>>>>> In fact, I'm no sure that the Acked is really meaning.:-
>>>>
>>>> Yes, by acking the patch I say I am ok with it and I agree it can go
>>>> through another tree.
>>>
>>> although I guess the two clocksource changes could very well just go
>>> through your tree. dsb() -> dsb(sy) is supposed to be equal and the
>>> second
>>> one is just cosmetics.  The Kconfig and dts changes need to wait in
>>> any case
>>> for 4.5 ... but I guess that may be true for the clocksource changes
>>> as well?
>>
>> Heiko, Caesar,
>>
>> I am wondering if the dsb() is really necessary. Is it possible you
>> test the timer by removing this instruction ? Otherwise I will have to
>> setup my board again and it will take awhile.
>>
>
> As the @Arnd suggestion,
>
> That's seem ok for me.
> Although the writel_relaxed() and writel() a bit different  with DSB()
> and L2's sync.
>
> Do I need send the patch v3?  I will test that on my board.
>
> I'm no sure that why the clocksource driver didn't use the
> writel_relaxed() to work.
> Okay, I think we should according to the suggestion or required.

I think the patch is trivial enough I can do the change myself if you 
test the change on your side. But it would be a good practice to send 
the patch you have tested. Up to you ;)

Thanks !

   -- Daniel


-- 
  <http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs

Follow Linaro:  <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro> Facebook |
<http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg> Twitter |
<http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog/> Blog


_______________________________________________
Linux-rockchip mailing list
Linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-rockchip

[PATCH v2 1/4] clocksource: rockchip: Make the driver more compatible

[Daniel Lezcano]

On 11/03/2015 03:00 AM, Caesar Wang wrote:
> Daniel,
>
> ? 2015?11?03? 01:28, Daniel Lezcano ??:
>> On 10/31/2015 12:47 AM, Heiko Stuebner wrote:
>>> Hi Daniel,
>>>
>>> Am Freitag, 30. Oktober 2015, 11:42:29 schrieb Daniel Lezcano:
>>>> On 10/30/2015 04:43 AM, Caesar Wang wrote:
>>>>> Hi Daniel,
>>>>>
>>>>> ? 2015?10?01? 03:14, Heiko St?bner ??:
>>>>>> Hi Daniel,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Am Dienstag, 29. September 2015, 06:18:03 schrieb Daniel Lezcano:
>>>>>>> On 09/25/2015 04:14 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.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Says:
>>>>>>>> /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).The "sy"
>>>>>>>> param
>>>>>>>> is the default which you are allow to omit, so on arm32 dsb()and
>>>>>>>> dsb(sy)
>>>>>>>> are the same.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Caesar Wang <wxt@rock-chips.com>
>>>>>>> Acked-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>
>>>>>> as you have "just" Acked these patches, I guess you are expecting
>>>>>> them
>>>>>> to go
>>>>>> through the same tree as the devicetree changes, right?
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm wonder if someone will apply this series patchs but the wait.:-)
>>>>> In fact, I'm no sure that the Acked is really meaning.:-
>>>>
>>>> Yes, by acking the patch I say I am ok with it and I agree it can go
>>>> through another tree.
>>>
>>> although I guess the two clocksource changes could very well just go
>>> through your tree. dsb() -> dsb(sy) is supposed to be equal and the
>>> second
>>> one is just cosmetics.  The Kconfig and dts changes need to wait in
>>> any case
>>> for 4.5 ... but I guess that may be true for the clocksource changes
>>> as well?
>>
>> Heiko, Caesar,
>>
>> I am wondering if the dsb() is really necessary. Is it possible you
>> test the timer by removing this instruction ? Otherwise I will have to
>> setup my board again and it will take awhile.
>>
>
> As the @Arnd suggestion,
>
> That's seem ok for me.
> Although the writel_relaxed() and writel() a bit different  with DSB()
> and L2's sync.
>
> Do I need send the patch v3?  I will test that on my board.
>
> I'm no sure that why the clocksource driver didn't use the
> writel_relaxed() to work.
> Okay, I think we should according to the suggestion or required.

I think the patch is trivial enough I can do the change myself if you 
test the change on your side. But it would be a good practice to send 
the patch you have tested. Up to you ;)

Thanks !

   -- Daniel


-- 
  <http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org ? Open source software for ARM SoCs

Follow Linaro:  <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro> Facebook |
<http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg> Twitter |
<http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog/> Blog

Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] clocksource: rockchip: Make the driver more compatible

[Caesar Wang]

在 2015年11月03日 16:32, Daniel Lezcano 写道:
> On 11/03/2015 03:00 AM, Caesar Wang wrote:
>> Daniel,
>>
>> 在 2015年11月03日 01:28, Daniel Lezcano 写道:
>>> On 10/31/2015 12:47 AM, Heiko Stuebner wrote:
>>>> Hi Daniel,
>>>>
>>>> Am Freitag, 30. Oktober 2015, 11:42:29 schrieb Daniel Lezcano:
>>>>> On 10/30/2015 04:43 AM, Caesar Wang wrote:
>>>>>> Hi Daniel,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 在 2015年10月01日 03:14, Heiko Stübner 写道:
>>>>>>> Hi Daniel,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Am Dienstag, 29. September 2015, 06:18:03 schrieb Daniel Lezcano:
>>>>>>>> On 09/25/2015 04:14 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.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Says:
>>>>>>>>> /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).The "sy"
>>>>>>>>> param
>>>>>>>>> is the default which you are allow to omit, so on arm32 dsb()and
>>>>>>>>> dsb(sy)
>>>>>>>>> are the same.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Caesar Wang <wxt@rock-chips.com>
>>>>>>>> Acked-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>
>>>>>>> as you have "just" Acked these patches, I guess you are expecting
>>>>>>> them
>>>>>>> to go
>>>>>>> through the same tree as the devicetree changes, right?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm wonder if someone will apply this series patchs but the wait.:-)
>>>>>> In fact, I'm no sure that the Acked is really meaning.:-
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, by acking the patch I say I am ok with it and I agree it can go
>>>>> through another tree.
>>>>
>>>> although I guess the two clocksource changes could very well just go
>>>> through your tree. dsb() -> dsb(sy) is supposed to be equal and the
>>>> second
>>>> one is just cosmetics.  The Kconfig and dts changes need to wait in
>>>> any case
>>>> for 4.5 ... but I guess that may be true for the clocksource changes
>>>> as well?
>>>
>>> Heiko, Caesar,
>>>
>>> I am wondering if the dsb() is really necessary. Is it possible you
>>> test the timer by removing this instruction ? Otherwise I will have to
>>> setup my board again and it will take awhile.
>>>
>>
>> As the @Arnd suggestion,
>>
>> That's seem ok for me.
>> Although the writel_relaxed() and writel() a bit different  with DSB()
>> and L2's sync.
>>
>> Do I need send the patch v3?  I will test that on my board.
>>
>> I'm no sure that why the clocksource driver didn't use the
>> writel_relaxed() to work.
>> Okay, I think we should according to the suggestion or required.
>
> I think the patch is trivial enough I can do the change myself if you 
> test the change on your side. But it would be a good practice to send 
> the patch you have tested. Up to you ;)
>

Yup, that's also happy work.

Feel free add my test tag if you remove the dsb().
Tested-by: Caesar Wang <wxt@rock-chips.com>

Thanks your send!

> Thanks !
>
>   -- Daniel
>
>


-- 
Thanks,
Caesar

Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] clocksource: rockchip: Make the driver more compatible

[Caesar Wang]

在 2015年11月03日 16:32, Daniel Lezcano 写道:
> On 11/03/2015 03:00 AM, Caesar Wang wrote:
>> Daniel,
>>
>> 在 2015年11月03日 01:28, Daniel Lezcano 写道:
>>> On 10/31/2015 12:47 AM, Heiko Stuebner wrote:
>>>> Hi Daniel,
>>>>
>>>> Am Freitag, 30. Oktober 2015, 11:42:29 schrieb Daniel Lezcano:
>>>>> On 10/30/2015 04:43 AM, Caesar Wang wrote:
>>>>>> Hi Daniel,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 在 2015年10月01日 03:14, Heiko Stübner 写道:
>>>>>>> Hi Daniel,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Am Dienstag, 29. September 2015, 06:18:03 schrieb Daniel Lezcano:
>>>>>>>> On 09/25/2015 04:14 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.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Says:
>>>>>>>>> /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).The "sy"
>>>>>>>>> param
>>>>>>>>> is the default which you are allow to omit, so on arm32 dsb()and
>>>>>>>>> dsb(sy)
>>>>>>>>> are the same.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Caesar Wang <wxt@rock-chips.com>
>>>>>>>> Acked-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>
>>>>>>> as you have "just" Acked these patches, I guess you are expecting
>>>>>>> them
>>>>>>> to go
>>>>>>> through the same tree as the devicetree changes, right?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm wonder if someone will apply this series patchs but the wait.:-)
>>>>>> In fact, I'm no sure that the Acked is really meaning.:-
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, by acking the patch I say I am ok with it and I agree it can go
>>>>> through another tree.
>>>>
>>>> although I guess the two clocksource changes could very well just go
>>>> through your tree. dsb() -> dsb(sy) is supposed to be equal and the
>>>> second
>>>> one is just cosmetics.  The Kconfig and dts changes need to wait in
>>>> any case
>>>> for 4.5 ... but I guess that may be true for the clocksource changes
>>>> as well?
>>>
>>> Heiko, Caesar,
>>>
>>> I am wondering if the dsb() is really necessary. Is it possible you
>>> test the timer by removing this instruction ? Otherwise I will have to
>>> setup my board again and it will take awhile.
>>>
>>
>> As the @Arnd suggestion,
>>
>> That's seem ok for me.
>> Although the writel_relaxed() and writel() a bit different  with DSB()
>> and L2's sync.
>>
>> Do I need send the patch v3?  I will test that on my board.
>>
>> I'm no sure that why the clocksource driver didn't use the
>> writel_relaxed() to work.
>> Okay, I think we should according to the suggestion or required.
>
> I think the patch is trivial enough I can do the change myself if you 
> test the change on your side. But it would be a good practice to send 
> the patch you have tested. Up to you ;)
>

Yup, that's also happy work.

Feel free add my test tag if you remove the dsb().
Tested-by: Caesar Wang <wxt@rock-chips.com>

Thanks your send!

> Thanks !
>
>   -- Daniel
>
>


-- 
Thanks,
Caesar


_______________________________________________
Linux-rockchip mailing list
Linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-rockchip

[PATCH v2 1/4] clocksource: rockchip: Make the driver more compatible

[Caesar Wang]

? 2015?11?03? 16:32, Daniel Lezcano ??:
> On 11/03/2015 03:00 AM, Caesar Wang wrote:
>> Daniel,
>>
>> ? 2015?11?03? 01:28, Daniel Lezcano ??:
>>> On 10/31/2015 12:47 AM, Heiko Stuebner wrote:
>>>> Hi Daniel,
>>>>
>>>> Am Freitag, 30. Oktober 2015, 11:42:29 schrieb Daniel Lezcano:
>>>>> On 10/30/2015 04:43 AM, Caesar Wang wrote:
>>>>>> Hi Daniel,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ? 2015?10?01? 03:14, Heiko St?bner ??:
>>>>>>> Hi Daniel,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Am Dienstag, 29. September 2015, 06:18:03 schrieb Daniel Lezcano:
>>>>>>>> On 09/25/2015 04:14 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.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Says:
>>>>>>>>> /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).The "sy"
>>>>>>>>> param
>>>>>>>>> is the default which you are allow to omit, so on arm32 dsb()and
>>>>>>>>> dsb(sy)
>>>>>>>>> are the same.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Caesar Wang <wxt@rock-chips.com>
>>>>>>>> Acked-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>
>>>>>>> as you have "just" Acked these patches, I guess you are expecting
>>>>>>> them
>>>>>>> to go
>>>>>>> through the same tree as the devicetree changes, right?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm wonder if someone will apply this series patchs but the wait.:-)
>>>>>> In fact, I'm no sure that the Acked is really meaning.:-
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, by acking the patch I say I am ok with it and I agree it can go
>>>>> through another tree.
>>>>
>>>> although I guess the two clocksource changes could very well just go
>>>> through your tree. dsb() -> dsb(sy) is supposed to be equal and the
>>>> second
>>>> one is just cosmetics.  The Kconfig and dts changes need to wait in
>>>> any case
>>>> for 4.5 ... but I guess that may be true for the clocksource changes
>>>> as well?
>>>
>>> Heiko, Caesar,
>>>
>>> I am wondering if the dsb() is really necessary. Is it possible you
>>> test the timer by removing this instruction ? Otherwise I will have to
>>> setup my board again and it will take awhile.
>>>
>>
>> As the @Arnd suggestion,
>>
>> That's seem ok for me.
>> Although the writel_relaxed() and writel() a bit different  with DSB()
>> and L2's sync.
>>
>> Do I need send the patch v3?  I will test that on my board.
>>
>> I'm no sure that why the clocksource driver didn't use the
>> writel_relaxed() to work.
>> Okay, I think we should according to the suggestion or required.
>
> I think the patch is trivial enough I can do the change myself if you 
> test the change on your side. But it would be a good practice to send 
> the patch you have tested. Up to you ;)
>

Yup, that's also happy work.

Feel free add my test tag if you remove the dsb().
Tested-by: Caesar Wang <wxt@rock-chips.com>

Thanks your send!

> Thanks !
>
>   -- Daniel
>
>


-- 
Thanks,
Caesar

Re: [PATCH v2 4/4] arm64: dts: rockchip: Add the needed timer for RK3368 SoC

[Heiko Stübner]

Am Freitag, 25. September 2015, 10:14:58 schrieb Caesar Wang:
> There is a need of a broadcast timer in this case to ensure proper
> wakeup when the cpus are in sleep mode and a timer expires.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Caesar Wang <wxt@rock-chips.com>

applied this patch to my dts64 branch for 4.5 .

The Kconfig option will probably need to wait for 4.6 though, due to the 
clocksource change going through Daniel's tree. Or I'll try to submit that 
post 4.5-rc1 as "fix" ... we'll see.


Heiko

[PATCH v2 4/4] arm64: dts: rockchip: Add the needed timer for RK3368 SoC

[Heiko Stübner]

Am Freitag, 25. September 2015, 10:14:58 schrieb Caesar Wang:
> There is a need of a broadcast timer in this case to ensure proper
> wakeup when the cpus are in sleep mode and a timer expires.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Caesar Wang <wxt@rock-chips.com>

applied this patch to my dts64 branch for 4.5 .

The Kconfig option will probably need to wait for 4.6 though, due to the 
clocksource change going through Daniel's tree. Or I'll try to submit that 
post 4.5-rc1 as "fix" ... we'll see.


Heiko

Re: [PATCH v2 3/4] arm64: Enable the timer on Rockchip architecture

[Heiko Stübner]

Am Freitag, 25. September 2015, 10:14:57 schrieb Caesar Wang:
> On the RK3368 SoC, support the APB timers for rockchip platform.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Caesar Wang <wxt@rock-chips.com>

applied to my soc64 branch for 4.6


Heiko

Re: [PATCH v2 3/4] arm64: Enable the timer on Rockchip architecture

[Heiko Stübner]

Am Freitag, 25. September 2015, 10:14:57 schrieb Caesar Wang:
> On the RK3368 SoC, support the APB timers for rockchip platform.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Caesar Wang <wxt-TNX95d0MmH7DzftRWevZcw@public.gmane.org>

applied to my soc64 branch for 4.6


Heiko
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

[PATCH v2 3/4] arm64: Enable the timer on Rockchip architecture

[Heiko Stübner]

Am Freitag, 25. September 2015, 10:14:57 schrieb Caesar Wang:
> On the RK3368 SoC, support the APB timers for rockchip platform.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Caesar Wang <wxt@rock-chips.com>

applied to my soc64 branch for 4.6


Heiko