Re: [PATCH 4/5] clocksource: rockchip: add support for rk3399 SoC

From: "Huang, Tao" <huangtao-TNX95d0MmH7DzftRWevZcw@public.gmane.org>
To: Daniel Lezcano
	<daniel.lezcano-QSEj5FYQhm4dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>,
	Caesar Wang <wxt-TNX95d0MmH7DzftRWevZcw@public.gmane.org>,
	Heiko Stuebner <heiko-4mtYJXux2i+zQB+pC5nmwQ@public.gmane.org>
Cc: dianders-F7+t8E8rja9g9hUCZPvPmw@public.gmane.org,
	linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
	linux-rockchip-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org,
	smbarber-hpIqsD4AKlfQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org,
	cf-TNX95d0MmH7DzftRWevZcw@public.gmane.org,
	briannorris-hpIqsD4AKlfQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx-hfZtesqFncYOwBW4kG4KsQ@public.gmane.org>,
	linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] clocksource: rockchip: add support for rk3399 SoC
Date: Tue, 31 May 2016 21:46:23 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <574D95AF.2020905@rock-chips.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <574CCCB4.1030001-QSEj5FYQhm4dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>

Hi Daniel:
On 2016年05月31日 07:28, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
> On 05/25/2016 11:50 AM, Caesar Wang wrote:
>> From: Huang Tao <huangtao@rock-chips.com>
>>
>> The CONTROL register offset is different from old SoCs.
>> For Linux driver, there are not functional changes at all.
>> Let's call it v2.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Huang Tao <huangtao@rock-chips.com>
>> Cc: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>
>> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
>> Cc: Heiko Stuebner <heiko@sntech.de>
>> Tested-by: Jianqun Xu <jay.xu@rock-chips.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Caesar Wang <wxt@rock-chips.com>
>> ---
> 
> That's hackish.
Yes:( I blamed our IC guy.
> 
> Please consider something like:
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/clocksource/rockchip_timer.c 
> b/drivers/clocksource/rockchip_timer.c
> index b991b28..b6ba6f9 100644
> --- a/drivers/clocksource/rockchip_timer.c
> +++ b/drivers/clocksource/rockchip_timer.c
> @@ -19,7 +19,8 @@
> 
>   #define TIMER_LOAD_COUNT0	0x00
>   #define TIMER_LOAD_COUNT1	0x04
> -#define TIMER_CONTROL_REG	0x10
> +#define TIMER_CONTROL_REG3288	0x10
> +#define TIMER_CONTROL_REG3399	0x1C
>   #define TIMER_INT_STATUS	0x18
> 
>   #define TIMER_DISABLE		0x0
> @@ -31,6 +32,7 @@
>   struct bc_timer {
>   	struct clock_event_device ce;
>   	void __iomem *base;
> +	void __iomem *ctrl;
>   	u32 freq;
>   };
> 
> @@ -46,15 +48,20 @@ static inline void __iomem *rk_base(struct 
> clock_event_device *ce)
>   	return rk_timer(ce)->base;
>   }
> 
> +static inline void __iomem *rk_ctrl(struct clock_event_device *ce)
> +{
> +        return rk_timer(ce)->ctrl;
> +}
> +
>   static inline void rk_timer_disable(struct clock_event_device *ce)
>   {
> -	writel_relaxed(TIMER_DISABLE, rk_base(ce) + TIMER_CONTROL_REG);
> +	writel_relaxed(TIMER_DISABLE, rk_ctrl(ce));
>   }
> 
>   static inline void rk_timer_enable(struct clock_event_device *ce, u32 
> flags)
>   {
>   	writel_relaxed(TIMER_ENABLE | TIMER_INT_UNMASK | flags,
> -		       rk_base(ce) + TIMER_CONTROL_REG);
> +		       rk_ctrl(ce));
>   }
> 
>   static void rk_timer_update_counter(unsigned long cycles,
> @@ -179,4 +186,18 @@ out_unmap:
>   	iounmap(bc_timer.base);
>   }
> 
> -CLOCKSOURCE_OF_DECLARE(rk_timer, "rockchip,rk3288-timer", rk_timer_init);
> +static void __init rk3288_timer_init(struct device_node *np)
> +{
> +	bc_timer.ctrl = TIMER_CONTROL_REG3288;
> +	rk_timer_init(np);
> +}
> +
> +static void __init rk3399_timer_init(struct device_node *np)
> +{
> +        bc_timer.ctrl = TIMER_CONTROL_REG3399;
> +	rk_timer_init(np);
> +}
> +
> +
> +CLOCKSOURCE_OF_DECLARE(rk_timer, "rockchip,rk3288-timer", 
> rk3288_timer_init);
> +CLOCKSOURCE_OF_DECLARE(rk_timer, "rockchip,rk3399-timer", 
> rk3399_timer_init);
> 
> 

I think you mean this patch otherwise compile will fail:
@@ -19,7 +19,8 @@

 #define TIMER_LOAD_COUNT0	0x00
 #define TIMER_LOAD_COUNT1	0x04
-#define TIMER_CONTROL_REG	0x10
+#define TIMER_CONTROL_REG3288	0x10
+#define TIMER_CONTROL_REG3399	0x1C
 #define TIMER_INT_STATUS	0x18

 #define TIMER_DISABLE		0x0
@@ -31,6 +32,7 @@
 struct bc_timer {
 	struct clock_event_device ce;
 	void __iomem *base;
+	u32 ctrl;
 	u32 freq;
 };

@@ -46,15 +48,20 @@ static inline void __iomem *rk_base(struct
clock_event_device *ce)
 	return rk_timer(ce)->base;
 }

+static inline void __iomem *rk_ctrl(struct clock_event_device *ce)
+{
+	return rk_timer(ce)->base + rk_timer(ce)->ctrl;
+}
+
 static inline void rk_timer_disable(struct clock_event_device *ce)
 {
-	writel_relaxed(TIMER_DISABLE, rk_base(ce) + TIMER_CONTROL_REG);
+	writel_relaxed(TIMER_DISABLE, rk_ctrl(ce));
 }

 static inline void rk_timer_enable(struct clock_event_device *ce, u32
flags)
 {
 	writel_relaxed(TIMER_ENABLE | TIMER_INT_UNMASK | flags,
-		       rk_base(ce) + TIMER_CONTROL_REG);
+		       rk_ctrl(ce));
 }

 static void rk_timer_update_counter(unsigned long cycles,
@@ -179,4 +186,19 @@ out_unmap:
 	iounmap(bc_timer.base);
 }

-CLOCKSOURCE_OF_DECLARE(rk_timer, "rockchip,rk3288-timer", rk_timer_init);
+static void __init rk3288_timer_init(struct device_node *np)
+{
+	bc_timer.ctrl = TIMER_CONTROL_REG3288;
+	rk_timer_init(np);
+}
+
+static void __init rk3399_timer_init(struct device_node *np)
+{
+	bc_timer.ctrl = TIMER_CONTROL_REG3399;
+	rk_timer_init(np);
+}
+
+CLOCKSOURCE_OF_DECLARE(rk3288_timer, "rockchip,rk3288-timer",
+		       rk3288_timer_init);
+CLOCKSOURCE_OF_DECLARE(rk3399_timer, "rockchip,rk3399-timer",
+		       rk3399_timer_init);

This patch will give us a little lager text size. If we do disassemble,
we can see additional LDR is called. I can accept this performance drop.
So we will send new patches.
BTW, the patch "clocksource: rockchip: remove unnecessary clear irq
before request_irq" can drop if we use this patch.

Thanks,
Huang, Tao


_______________________________________________
Linux-rockchip mailing list
Linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-rockchip
