[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20120222162631.GE9407@game.jcrosoft.org>
Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2012 17:26:31 +0100
From: Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD <plagnioj@...osoft.com>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc: Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@...el.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
rmallon@...il.com, linux@....linux.org.uk
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 02/19] ARM: at91/at91x40: remove use of
at91_sys_read/write
On 14:36 Wed 22 Feb , Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> Hi Nicolas and Jean-Christophe,
>
> On Wednesday 22 February 2012, Nicolas Ferre wrote:
> > --- a/arch/arm/mach-at91/at91x40.c
> > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-at91/at91x40.c
> > @@ -44,7 +44,7 @@ static void at91x40_idle(void)
> > * Disable the processor clock. The processor will be automatically
> > * re-enabled by an interrupt or by a reset.
> > */
> > - at91_sys_write(AT91_PS_CR, AT91_PS_CR_CPU);
> > + __raw_writel(AT91_PS_CR_CPU, AT91_PS_CR);
> > cpu_do_idle();
> > }
>
> How about making this writel_relaxed in the process?
> I would like to see the use of __raw_*() get reduced in code that gets
> touched. In most cases writel_relaxed/readl_relaxed is the correct
> accessor function instead.
It will for next release I plan to switch all of the at one
today I don't want to change it as the same time
Best Regards,
J.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists