From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754215AbcKPPfU (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Nov 2016 10:35:20 -0500 Received: from mail-wm0-f42.google.com ([74.125.82.42]:37245 "EHLO mail-wm0-f42.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753281AbcKPPfR (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Nov 2016 10:35:17 -0500 Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2016 16:35:12 +0100 From: Daniel Lezcano To: Arnd Bergmann Cc: Linus Walleij , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: ux500: fix prcmu_is_cpu_in_wfi() calculation Message-ID: <20161116153512.GA2155@mai> References: <20161116152047.3336967-1-arnd@arndb.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <20161116152047.3336967-1-arnd@arndb.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 04:20:37PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > This function clearly never worked and always returns true, > as pointed out by gcc-7: > > arch/arm/mach-ux500/pm.c: In function 'prcmu_is_cpu_in_wfi': > arch/arm/mach-ux500/pm.c:137:212: error: ?: using integer constants in boolean context, the expression will always evaluate to 'true' [-Werror=int-in-bool-context] > > With the added braces, the condition actually makes sense. > > Fixes: 34fe6f107eab ("mfd : Check if the other db8500 core is in WFI") > Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann > --- > arch/arm/mach-ux500/pm.c | 4 ++-- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-ux500/pm.c b/arch/arm/mach-ux500/pm.c > index 8538910db202..a970e7fcba9e 100644 > --- a/arch/arm/mach-ux500/pm.c > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-ux500/pm.c > @@ -134,8 +134,8 @@ bool prcmu_pending_irq(void) > */ > bool prcmu_is_cpu_in_wfi(int cpu) > { > - return readl(PRCM_ARM_WFI_STANDBY) & cpu ? PRCM_ARM_WFI_STANDBY_WFI1 : > - PRCM_ARM_WFI_STANDBY_WFI0; > + return readl(PRCM_ARM_WFI_STANDBY) & > + (cpu ? PRCM_ARM_WFI_STANDBY_WFI1 : PRCM_ARM_WFI_STANDBY_WFI0); > } > > /* Acked-by: Daniel Lezcano Very strange this board did not hang with this broken function. It is used in a critical function for cpuidle. Is it possible to make a quick test with this cpuidle test program [1] ? Thanks! -- Daniel [1] https://git.linaro.org/power/pm-qa.git/tree/cpuidle/cpuidle_killer.c -- Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog