From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S965867AbbBDM7S (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Feb 2015 07:59:18 -0500 Received: from v094114.home.net.pl ([79.96.170.134]:58898 "HELO v094114.home.net.pl" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S965549AbbBDM7Q (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Feb 2015 07:59:16 -0500 From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" To: Russell King - ARM Linux Cc: Mark Salter , Mark Rutland , Mark Langsdorf , linaro-acpi@lists.linaro.org, Catalin Marinas , Will Deacon , wangyijing@huawei.com, Rob Herring , Lorenzo Pieralisi , Timur Tabi , Daniel Lezcano , linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, Grant Likely , Charles.Garcia-Tobin@arm.com, phoenix.liyi@huawei.com, Robert Richter , Jason Cooper , Arnd Bergmann , Marc Zyngier , Jon Masters , Mark Brown , Bjorn Helgaas , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Ashwin Chaugule , Graeme Gregory , Randy Dunlap , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Hanjun Guo , suravee.suthikulpanit@amd.com, Sudeep Holla , Olof Johansson Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 02/21] acpi: fix acpi_os_ioremap for arm64 Date: Wed, 04 Feb 2015 14:22:10 +0100 Message-ID: <1918367.3D21c7WuYp@vostro.rjw.lan> User-Agent: KMail/4.11.5 (Linux/3.16.0-rc5+; KDE/4.11.5; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: <20150204104832.GF8656@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> References: <1422881149-8177-1-git-send-email-hanjun.guo@linaro.org> <8901765.mLfPOCUyAN@vostro.rjw.lan> <20150204104832.GF8656@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wednesday, February 04, 2015 10:48:32 AM Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > On Tue, Feb 03, 2015 at 11:04:27PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > On Tuesday, February 03, 2015 12:29:36 PM Mark Salter wrote: > > > On Mon, 2015-02-02 at 23:14 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > > On Monday, February 02, 2015 08:45:30 PM Hanjun Guo wrote: > > > > > From: Mark Salter > > > > > > > > > > The acpi_os_ioremap() function may be used to map normal RAM or IO > > > > > regions. The current implementation simply uses ioremap_cache(). This > > > > > will work for some architectures, but arm64 ioremap_cache() cannot be > > > > > used to map IO regions which don't support caching. So for arm64, use > > > > > ioremap() for non-RAM regions. > > > > > > > > > > CC: Rafael J Wysocki > > > > > Signed-off-by: Mark Salter > > > > > Signed-off-by: Hanjun Guo > > > > > --- > > > > > include/acpi/acpi_io.h | 6 ++++++ > > > > > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+) > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/include/acpi/acpi_io.h b/include/acpi/acpi_io.h > > > > > index 444671e..9d573db 100644 > > > > > --- a/include/acpi/acpi_io.h > > > > > +++ b/include/acpi/acpi_io.h > > > > > @@ -1,11 +1,17 @@ > > > > > #ifndef _ACPI_IO_H_ > > > > > #define _ACPI_IO_H_ > > > > > > > > > > +#include > > > > > #include > > > > > > > > > > static inline void __iomem *acpi_os_ioremap(acpi_physical_address phys, > > > > > acpi_size size) > > > > > { > > > > > +#ifdef CONFIG_ARM64 > > > > > + if (!page_is_ram(phys >> PAGE_SHIFT)) > > > > > + return ioremap(phys, size); > > > > > +#endif > > > > > > > > I don't want to see #ifdef CONFIG_ARM64 in this file. > > > > > > > > > > How about something like: > > > > > > From: Mark Salter > > > Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2015 10:51:16 -0500 > > > Subject: [PATCH] acpi: fix acpi_os_ioremap for arm64 > > > > > > The acpi_os_ioremap() function may be used to map normal RAM or IO > > > regions. The current implementation simply uses ioremap_cache(). This > > > will work for some architectures, but arm64 ioremap_cache() cannot be > > > used to map IO regions which don't support caching. So for arm64, use > > > ioremap() for non-RAM regions. > > > > > > CC: Rafael J Wysocki > > > Signed-off-by: Mark Salter > > > --- > > > arch/arm64/include/asm/acpi.h | 14 ++++++++++++++ > > > include/acpi/acpi_io.h | 3 +++ > > > 2 files changed, 17 insertions(+) > > > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/acpi.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/acpi.h > > > index ea4d2b3..db82bc3 100644 > > > --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/acpi.h > > > +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/acpi.h > > > @@ -14,6 +14,7 @@ > > > > > > #include > > > > > > +#include > > > #include > > > > > > /* Basic configuration for ACPI */ > > > @@ -100,4 +101,17 @@ static inline bool acpi_psci_use_hvc(void) { return false; } > > > static inline void acpi_init_cpus(void) { } > > > #endif /* CONFIG_ACPI */ > > > > > > +/* > > > + * ACPI table mapping > > > + */ > > > +static inline void __iomem *acpi_os_ioremap(acpi_physical_address phys, > > > + acpi_size size) > > > +{ > > > + if (!page_is_ram(phys >> PAGE_SHIFT)) > > > + return ioremap(phys, size); > > > + > > > + return ioremap_cache(phys, size); > > > +} > > > +#define acpi_os_ioremap acpi_os_ioremap > > > > If you want to do it this way, use __weak. You won't need the #define then. > > Otherwise, please use a proper CONFIG_ARCH_ symbol. > > How does __weak work with inline functions? I don't believe it does. It doesn't work with inline funtions, but the function here doesn't have to be inline. > Moreover, __weak is positively harmful when you consider it adds bloat > and dead code - the overriden __weak function is left behind in the > resulting final image. Fair enough. -- I speak only for myself. Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.