From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: fu.wei@linaro.org (fu.wei at linaro.org) Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2016 21:48:58 +0800 Subject: [PATCH v16 05/15] clocksource/drivers/arm_arch_timer: fix a bug in arch_timer_register about arch_timer_uses_ppi In-Reply-To: <1479304148-2965-1-git-send-email-fu.wei@linaro.org> References: <1479304148-2965-1-git-send-email-fu.wei@linaro.org> Message-ID: <1479304148-2965-6-git-send-email-fu.wei@linaro.org> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org From: Fu Wei The patch fix a potential bug about arch_timer_uses_ppi in arch_timer_register. On ARM64, we don't use ARCH_TIMER_PHYS_SECURE_PPI in Linux, so we will just igorne it in init code. If arch_timer_uses_ppi is ARCH_TIMER_PHYS_NONSECURE_PPI, the orignal code of arch_timer_uses_ppi may go wrong. Signed-off-by: Fu Wei --- drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c b/drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c index dd1040d..6de164f 100644 --- a/drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c +++ b/drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c @@ -699,7 +699,7 @@ static int __init arch_timer_register(void) case ARCH_TIMER_PHYS_NONSECURE_PPI: err = request_percpu_irq(ppi, arch_timer_handler_phys, "arch_timer", arch_timer_evt); - if (!err && arch_timer_ppi[ARCH_TIMER_PHYS_NONSECURE_PPI]) { + if (!err && arch_timer_has_nonsecure_ppi()) { ppi = arch_timer_ppi[ARCH_TIMER_PHYS_NONSECURE_PPI]; err = request_percpu_irq(ppi, arch_timer_handler_phys, "arch_timer", arch_timer_evt); -- 2.7.4