[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <c51c45ef-e769-406f-ac2f-53c90bc78d8d@linaro.org>
Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2025 19:29:25 +0200
From: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>
To: Ghennadi Procopciuc <ghennadi.procopciuc@....nxp.com>, tglx@...utronix.de
Cc: S32@....com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/20] clocksource/drivers/vf_pit: Rework the base address
usage
On 07/07/2025 14:03, Ghennadi Procopciuc wrote:
> On 7/5/2025 7:01 PM, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
> [...]
>
>> -static int __init pit_clockevent_init(struct pit_timer *pit, unsigned long rate, int irq)
>> +static int __init pit_clockevent_init(struct pit_timer *pit, void __iomem *base,
>> + unsigned long rate, int irq)
>> {
>> + /*
>> + * PIT0 and PIT1 can be chained to build a 64-bit timer, so
>> + * choose PIT3 as clockevent and leave PIT0 and PIT1 unused
>> + * for anyone else who needs them.
>> + */
>> + pit->clkevt_base = base + PIT_CH(3);
>> +
>
> This description is somewhat misleading, as it refers to PIT instances, whereas the code actually operates on PIT channels 0 and 1.
>
Actually it is what we have already in the driver, it is just moved
around. I'll take the opportunity to change the content if it matters.
What about:
"The channels 0 and 1 can be chained to build a 64-bit timer. Let's use
the channel 3 as a clockevent and leave the channels 0 and 1 unused for
anyone else who needs them."
?
--
<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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists