From: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org>
To: David Dai <daidavid1@codeaurora.org>,
linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, linux-clk@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: georgi.djakov@linaro.org, bjorn.andersson@linaro.org,
evgreen@google.com, tdas@codeaurora.org, elder@linaro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] clk: qcom: clk-rpmh: Add IPA clock support
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2019 10:49:36 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <154775097646.169631.4497796001681545243@swboyd.mtv.corp.google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7db43e9e-0f5c-9c26-6f26-c601ec69f964@codeaurora.org>
Quoting David Dai (2019-01-16 16:54:39)
>
> On 1/14/2019 8:47 AM, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> > Quoting David Dai (2019-01-11 16:56:14)
> >> On 1/9/2019 11:28 AM, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> >>> Quoting David Dai (2018-12-13 18:35:04)
> >>>> +
> >>>> +#define BCM_TCS_CMD(valid, vote) \
> >>>> + (BCM_TCS_CMD_COMMIT_MASK | \
> >>>> + ((valid) << BCM_TCS_CMD_VALID_SHIFT) | \
> >>>> + ((cpu_to_le32(vote) & \
> >>> Why?
> >> Sorry, could you clarify this question? If you're referring to the
> >> cpu_to_le32, shouldn't we be explicit about converting endianness even
> >> if it might be redundant for this particular qcom platform?
> > Is only the vote part of the message in little endian format and the
> > rest is native CPU endianess? It's very odd to see that jammed in the
> > middle of a bit packing statement like that. Typically the whole u32
> > would be in one or the other endianness. Also, sparse right complains
> > about this macro and it's usage, so something is wrong.
> Point taken, I'll leave it out of the macro for now.
> > I think one other problem is that rpmh API doesn't really talk about
> > endianness here and that's busted. So if you want to fix endianness
> > issues that needs to be fixed first.
>
> Since a similar macro is being used as part of the interconnect provider
> driver, I was thinking a better place for this macro might be in the
> tcs.h as part of the rpmh driver? I could submit a different patch for
> rpmh that mentions endianness along with this change.
Sure that's fine. But be warned that making a dependency across kernel
trees is best avoided. I would do that sort of cleanup and consolidation
after the two drivers are merged upstream so that it can go via either
tree.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-01-17 18:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-12-14 2:35 [PATCH v1] clk: qcom: clk-rpmh: Add IPA clock support David Dai
2019-01-09 19:28 ` Stephen Boyd
2019-01-12 0:56 ` David Dai
2019-01-14 16:47 ` Stephen Boyd
2019-01-17 0:54 ` David Dai
2019-01-17 18:49 ` Stephen Boyd [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=154775097646.169631.4497796001681545243@swboyd.mtv.corp.google.com \
--to=sboyd@kernel.org \
--cc=bjorn.andersson@linaro.org \
--cc=daidavid1@codeaurora.org \
--cc=elder@linaro.org \
--cc=evgreen@google.com \
--cc=georgi.djakov@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-clk@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tdas@codeaurora.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).