[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <d08bcefc-7698-a968-7a35-ed9ab62bd623@st.com>
Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 10:01:49 +0000
From: Amelie DELAUNAY <amelie.delaunay@...com>
To: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com>
CC: Alessandro Zummo <a.zummo@...ertech.it>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Maxime Coquelin <mcoquelin.stm32@...il.com>,
Alexandre TORGUE <alexandre.torgue@...com>,
"linux-rtc@...r.kernel.org" <linux-rtc@...r.kernel.org>,
"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] rtc: stm32: rework register management to prepare
other version of RTC
Hi,
On 05/16/2018 10:25 PM, Alexandre Belloni wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 09/05/2018 17:46:08+0200, Amelie Delaunay wrote:
>> static void stm32_rtc_wpr_unlock(struct stm32_rtc *rtc)
>> {
>> - writel_relaxed(RTC_WPR_1ST_KEY, rtc->base + STM32_RTC_WPR);
>> - writel_relaxed(RTC_WPR_2ND_KEY, rtc->base + STM32_RTC_WPR);
>> + struct stm32_rtc_registers regs = rtc->data->regs;
>
> regs should probably be a pointer to ensure that no copy is made. I've
> actually checked and it doesn't make a difference because gcc is smart
> enough to not make the copy.
>
...
>> static irqreturn_t stm32_rtc_alarm_irq(int irq, void *dev_id)
>> {
>> struct stm32_rtc *rtc = (struct stm32_rtc *)dev_id;
>> - unsigned int isr, cr;
>> + struct stm32_rtc_registers regs = rtc->data->regs;
>> + struct stm32_rtc_events evts = rtc->data->events;
>
> Ditto for evts.
>
I prepare a v3 with const struct stm32_rtc_registers *regs and const
struct stm32_rtc_events *evts.
>> + unsigned int status, cr;
>>
>> mutex_lock(&rtc->rtc_dev->ops_lock);
>>
>> - isr = readl_relaxed(rtc->base + STM32_RTC_ISR);
>> - cr = readl_relaxed(rtc->base + STM32_RTC_CR);
>> + status = readl_relaxed(rtc->base + regs.isr);
>> + cr = readl_relaxed(rtc->base + regs.cr);
>>
>> - if ((isr & STM32_RTC_ISR_ALRAF) &&
>> + if ((status & evts.alra) &&
>> (cr & STM32_RTC_CR_ALRAIE)) {
>> /* Alarm A flag - Alarm interrupt */
>> dev_dbg(&rtc->rtc_dev->dev, "Alarm occurred\n");
>
> ...
>
>> @@ -641,7 +710,7 @@ static int stm32_rtc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>
>> /*
>> * After a system reset, RTC_ISR.INITS flag can be read to check if
>> - * the calendar has been initalized or not. INITS flag is reset by a
>> + * the calendar has been initialized or not. INITS flag is reset by a
>> * power-on reset (no vbat, no power-supply). It is not reset if
>> * rtc_ck parent clock has changed (so RTC prescalers need to be
>> * changed). That's why we cannot rely on this flag to know if RTC
>> @@ -666,7 +735,7 @@ static int stm32_rtc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>> "alarm won't be able to wake up the system");
>>
>> rtc->rtc_dev = devm_rtc_device_register(&pdev->dev, pdev->name,
>> - &stm32_rtc_ops, THIS_MODULE);
>> + &stm32_rtc_ops, THIS_MODULE);
>> if (IS_ERR(rtc->rtc_dev)) {
>> ret = PTR_ERR(rtc->rtc_dev);
>> dev_err(&pdev->dev, "rtc device registration failed, err=%d\n",
>
> Those two changes should go into a separate cleanup patch.
>
OK, new patch for these two changes in v3.
Thanks for reviewing,
Amelie
Powered by blists - more mailing lists