Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.kernel > #1260813 > unrolled thread

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

Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] clocksource: rockchip: Make the driver more  compatible Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> - 2015-11-02 18:30 +0100
    Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] clocksource: rockchip: Make the driver more  compatible Caesar Wang <caesar.upstream@gmail.com> - 2015-11-03 03:10 +0100
      Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] clocksource: rockchip: Make the driver more  compatible Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> - 2015-11-03 09:40 +0100
        Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] clocksource: rockchip: Make the driver more  compatible Caesar Wang <caesar.upstream@gmail.com> - 2015-11-03 11:10 +0100

#1260813 — Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] clocksource: rockchip: Make the driver more compatible

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

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#1261154

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

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1261296

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

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1261362

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

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel

csiph-web