[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170328130552.GA8643@leverpostej>
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 14:05:52 +0100
From: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
To: Fu Wei <fu.wei@...aro.org>
Cc: Jon Masters <jcm@...masters.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>,
Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>,
Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@....com>,
Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>,
Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@...aro.org>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
Linaro ACPI Mailman List <linaro-acpi@...ts.linaro.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
rruigrok@...eaurora.org, "Abdulhamid, Harb" <harba@...eaurora.org>,
Christopher Covington <cov@...eaurora.org>,
Timur Tabi <timur@...eaurora.org>,
G Gregory <graeme.gregory@...aro.org>,
Al Stone <al.stone@...aro.org>, Jon Masters <jcm@...hat.com>,
Wei Huang <wei@...hat.com>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
Suravee Suthikulpanit <Suravee.Suthikulpanit@....com>,
Leo Duran <leo.duran@....com>,
Wim Van Sebroeck <wim@...ana.be>,
Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,
linux-watchdog@...r.kernel.org, Tomasz Nowicki <tn@...ihalf.com>,
Christoffer Dall <christoffer.dall@...aro.org>,
Julien Grall <julien.grall@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v22 00/11] acpi, clocksource: add GTDT driver and GTDT
support in arm_arch_timer
On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 08:34:12PM +0800, Fu Wei wrote:
> Hi Jon,
>
> Thanks for your email
> An hour ago, I just got some feedback from Lorenzo, will update my
> patchset ASAP according to his suggestion.
>
> But I still need some feedback form Mark, I can see some progress here:
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mark/linux.git/log/?h=arch-timer/gtdt
>
> I guess I should rebase my patchset to his gtdt branch for v23.
>
> So now, I am waiting for Mark's feedback to move on.
Sorry for the delay; I have not had the time to focus on this as I would
like to. I'm happy with patches 1-4, but from patch 5 onwards, there's
one change I'd like to see.
I'd prefer that mmio timer frame rame N was always stored at
arch_timer_mem::frame[N], rather than arch_timer_mem::frame[] being in
an arbitrary order. That will make arch_timer_mem_frame::frame_nr
redundant.
To allow arch_timer_mem::frame[] this to be sparse, I'm happy to have a
bool arch_timer_mem_frame::valid field that we set when probing each
frame. Then we don't need arch_timer_mem::num_frames.
This will make iterating over the frames far less confusing, and makes
it simple to detect when a frame number is erroneously reused.
Otherwise, I'm largely happy to pick the rest and apply any fixups
myself.
Thanks,
Mark.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists