[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <3a294c92-bcc6-b42e-b3af-72bc5f607fd9@fb.com>
Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2018 22:08:07 +0000
From: Tao Ren <taoren@...com>
To: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
CC: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Joel Stanley <joel@....id.au>,
Andrew Jeffery <andrew@...id.au>,
"mine260309@...il.com" <mine260309@...il.com>,
"OpenBMC Maillist" <openbmc@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-aspeed@...ts.ozlabs.org" <linux-aspeed@...ts.ozlabs.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] clocksource/drivers/fttmr010: fix invalid interrupt
register access
On 10/02/2018 12:35 AM, Linus Walleij wrote:
> This struct member "count_down" is a bit badly named now don't you think?
> The patch is fine semantically, but please rename this member "is_aspeed" or something like that and update the code everywhere,
Thank you Linus for the quick review.
I was actually planning a cleanup patch which handles is_aspeed/count_down stuff. Basically we have 2 options:
1) adding "is_aspeed" flag. "count_down" is kept because potentially faraday-fttmr could also be configured as count_down timer (although I don't see any reason to do so).
2) renaming "count_down" to "is_aspeed". By doing this, we set restriction that faraday-fttmr will always be upward.
What's your thought? Do you want me to include all the changes in this diff?
> then insert a comments like
> /* The Aspeed variant counts downward */
> /* The Aspeed variant does not have a match interrupt */
> in the code snippets so we see what is going on.
Make sense. Let me add more comments.
Thanks,
Tao Ren
Powered by blists - more mailing lists