From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mark Rutland Subject: Re: [PATCH v21 01/13] clocksource: arm_arch_timer: introduce two functions to get the frequency from mmio and sysreg. Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2017 10:41:54 +0000 Message-ID: <20170320104153.GA18585@leverpostej> References: <20170206185015.12296-1-fu.wei@linaro.org> <20170206185015.12296-2-fu.wei@linaro.org> <20170317180513.GB15909@leverpostej> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=m.gmane.org@lists.infradead.org To: Fu Wei Cc: Linaro ACPI Mailman List , Catalin Marinas , Will Deacon , rruigrok@codeaurora.org, Wim Van Sebroeck , Wei Huang , Lorenzo Pieralisi , Al Stone , Tomasz Nowicki , Timur Tabi , Daniel Lezcano , ACPI Devel Maling List , Guenter Roeck , Len Brown , "Abdulhamid, Harb" , Julien Grall , linux-watchdog@vger.kernel.org, Arnd Bergmann , Marc Zyngier , Jon Masters , Christopher Covington , Thomas Gleixner , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, G Gregory List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 05:43:29PM +0800, Fu Wei wrote: > On 20 March 2017 at 15:36, Fu Wei wrote: > > On 18 March 2017 at 02:05, Mark Rutland wrote: > >> On Tue, Feb 07, 2017 at 02:50:03AM +0800, fu.wei@linaro.org wrote: > >>> +static u32 arch_timer_get_mmio_freq(void __iomem *cntbase) > >>> +{ > >>> + /* > >>> + * Try to get the frequency from the CNTFRQ of timer frame registers. > >>> + * Note: please verify cntbase in caller. > >>> + */ > >>> + return readl_relaxed(cntbase + CNTFRQ); > >>> +} > >> > >> Wrapping the MMIO read makes sense if we're going to do this in more > >> than one place, so I'm happy with this wrapper. > >> > >> If you can s/arch_timer_get_mmio_freq/arch_timer_get_cntfrq/, and drop > > > > sorry, May I guess that is > > "s/arch_timer_get_mmio_freq/arch_timer_get_mmio_cntfrq/" > > or > > "s/arch_timer_get_mmio_freq/arch_timer_mem_get_cntfrq/" > > > > which one do you prefer? :-) > > keeping using arch_timer_get_cntfrq(); for per-CPU arch timer, then > > +static u32 arch_timer_mem_get_cntfrq(void __iomem *cntbase) > +{ > + return readl_relaxed(cntbase + CNTFRQ); > +} > + That looks perfect to me. Sorry for the confusion above! Mark.