From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751558AbbIQKTl (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Sep 2015 06:19:41 -0400 Received: from mail-pa0-f41.google.com ([209.85.220.41]:33114 "EHLO mail-pa0-f41.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750951AbbIQKTk (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Sep 2015 06:19:40 -0400 Message-ID: <55FA93B0.40504@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2015 18:19:28 +0800 From: Caesar Wang User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Daniel Lezcano , Caesar Wang , Heiko Stuebner , Catalin Marinas , Will Deacon CC: linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org, Thomas Gleixner , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] clocksource: rockchip: Make the driver more readability and compatible References: <1442476272-31723-1-git-send-email-wxt@rock-chips.com> <1442476272-31723-2-git-send-email-wxt@rock-chips.com> <55FA83D5.9010504@linaro.org> <55FA87AA.4040807@gmail.com> <55FA9099.7000903@linaro.org> In-Reply-To: <55FA9099.7000903@linaro.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org 在 2015年09月17日 18:06, Daniel Lezcano 写道: > On 09/17/2015 11:28 AM, Caesar Wang wrote: >> Hi Daniel, >> >> >> 在 2015年09月17日 17:11, Daniel Lezcano 写道: >>> >>> Hi Caesar, >>> >>> >>> On 09/17/2015 09:51 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. >>>> >>>> logs: >>>> ... >>>> drivers/clocksource/rockchip_timer.c:156:13: error: 'NO_IRQ' >>>> undeclared >>> >>> I think the NO_IRQ definition is missing for ARM64. >> >> Yep, Maybe better to compatible if we don't use the 'NO_IRQ', > > Hmm, after digging into drivers/of/irq.c and kernel/irq/irqdomain.c > > when there is an error it returns zero. So NO_IRQ and -1 are not > correct and on the other side zero can be a valid irq. That sounds a > little bit fuzzy to me. I believe the 'NO_IRQ' is better select if 'NO_IRQ' is defined on ARM64 platform. irq = irq_of_parse_and_map(np, 0); if (irq == NO_IRQ) ... Also, that's ok if we instead of the 'irq < 0' or '!irq' , right? > >>>> /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). >>> >>> What happens to ARM32 then ? >>> >> >> The dsb() is ok for ARM32, the ARM32/64 are OK if we can convert the >> dsb() to dsb(sy). >> I believe all drivers with 'dsb()' have same issue on ARM64 platform. >> >>>> Meanwhile, I change a bit to make the code more readability for driver >>>> when I check the code style. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Caesar Wang >>> >>> >> >> > > > > -- > Thanks, > Caesar