linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/3] clocksource: rockchip: Make the driver more readability and compatible

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <55FA9099.7000903@linaro.org>
Date:	Thu, 17 Sep 2015 12:06:17 +0200
From:	Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>
To:	Caesar Wang <caesar.upstream@...il.com>,
	Heiko Stuebner <heiko@...ech.de>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
	Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>
CC:	Caesar Wang <wxt@...k-chips.com>,
	linux-rockchip@...ts.infradead.org,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] clocksource: rockchip: Make the driver more readability
 and compatible

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.

>>> /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 <wxt@...k-chips.com>
>>
>>
>
>


-- 
  <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@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/