| Message ID | 1370247004-31846-1-git-send-email-josephl@nvidia.com |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted, archived |
| Headers | show |
On 06/03/2013 02:10 AM, Joseph Lo wrote: > Removing the ifdef of ARCH_TEGRA_SoC in the tegra_resume function. Because > we always build with all Tegra SoCs support and had a runtime chip > detection code there. And we expect most of the chips would need the code > in the future. > > We also fix a typo of a macro name that cause a build error. OK, this fixes the build issue, but this patch raises some questions about the code... > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-tegra/reset-handler.S b/arch/arm/mach-tegra/reset-handler.S > -#ifndef CONFIG_ARCH_TEGRA_2x_SOC > /* Are we on Tegra20? */ > cmp r6, #TEGRA20 > beq 1f @ Yes Was that ifdef completely incorrect before? I can see why the cmp/beq might be ifdef'd (although it's not worth it), but I assume the code after that beq was intended to run on all chips after Tegra20. The ifdef as it was written does something rather different; it prevents any of that code from running unless the kernel doesn't have Tegra20 support. So, I think that the removal of the ifdef is more of a bug-fix that "because we always build with all Tegra SoCs support. Let me know, and I'll re-write the commit description to something more accurate... > /* Clear the flow controller flags for this CPU. */ > - cpu_to_csr_req r1, r0 > + cpu_to_csr_reg r1, r0 > mov32 r2, TEGRA_FLOW_CTRL_BASE > ldr r1, [r2, r1] > /* Clear event & intr flag */ > @@ -70,7 +69,6 @@ no_cpu0_chk: > bic r1, r1, r0 > str r1, [r2] > 1: > -#endif > > check_cpu_part_num 0xc09, r8, r9 > bne not_ca9 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-tegra" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On Monday 03 June 2013, Stephen Warren wrote: > Was that ifdef completely incorrect before? I can see why the cmp/beq > might be ifdef'd (although it's not worth it), but I assume the code > after that beq was intended to run on all chips after Tegra20. The ifdef > as it was written does something rather different; it prevents any of > that code from running unless the kernel doesn't have Tegra20 support. > So, I think that the removal of the ifdef is more of a bug-fix that > "because we always build with all Tegra SoCs support. Let me know, and > I'll re-write the commit description to something more accurate... The #ifdef was recently changed from #if TEGRA3 to #if !TEGRA2, which support for TEGRA4 was added. I think this is where it broke. Arnd -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-tegra" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On Tue, 2013-06-04 at 06:48 +0800, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Monday 03 June 2013, Stephen Warren wrote: > > Was that ifdef completely incorrect before? I can see why the cmp/beq > > might be ifdef'd (although it's not worth it), but I assume the code > > after that beq was intended to run on all chips after Tegra20. The ifdef > > as it was written does something rather different; it prevents any of > > that code from running unless the kernel doesn't have Tegra20 support. > > So, I think that the removal of the ifdef is more of a bug-fix that > > "because we always build with all Tegra SoCs support. Let me know, and > > I'll re-write the commit description to something more accurate... > > The #ifdef was recently changed from #if TEGRA3 to #if !TEGRA2, which support > for TEGRA4 was added. I think this is where it broke. > Yes, exactly. Sorry again for the error code. Joseph -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-tegra" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On 06/03/2013 02:10 AM, Joseph Lo wrote: > Removing the ifdef of ARCH_TEGRA_SoC in the tegra_resume function. Because > we always build with all Tegra SoCs support and had a runtime chip > detection code there. And we expect most of the chips would need the code > in the future. > > We also fix a typo of a macro name that cause a build error. Applied to Tegra's for-3.11/soc, with re-written commit description. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-tegra" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-tegra/reset-handler.S b/arch/arm/mach-tegra/reset-handler.S index d2042ac..39dc9e7 100644 --- a/arch/arm/mach-tegra/reset-handler.S +++ b/arch/arm/mach-tegra/reset-handler.S @@ -54,12 +54,11 @@ ENTRY(tegra_resume) bne cpu_resume @ no no_cpu0_chk: -#ifndef CONFIG_ARCH_TEGRA_2x_SOC /* Are we on Tegra20? */ cmp r6, #TEGRA20 beq 1f @ Yes /* Clear the flow controller flags for this CPU. */ - cpu_to_csr_req r1, r0 + cpu_to_csr_reg r1, r0 mov32 r2, TEGRA_FLOW_CTRL_BASE ldr r1, [r2, r1] /* Clear event & intr flag */ @@ -70,7 +69,6 @@ no_cpu0_chk: bic r1, r1, r0 str r1, [r2] 1: -#endif check_cpu_part_num 0xc09, r8, r9 bne not_ca9
Removing the ifdef of ARCH_TEGRA_SoC in the tegra_resume function. Because we always build with all Tegra SoCs support and had a runtime chip detection code there. And we expect most of the chips would need the code in the future. We also fix a typo of a macro name that cause a build error. Reported-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> Signed-off-by: Joseph Lo <josephl@nvidia.com> --- arch/arm/mach-tegra/reset-handler.S | 4 +--- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-)