From: linux@arm.linux.org.uk (Russell King - ARM Linux)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH 5/7] at91 : fix dirty hack for the selfrefresh function
Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2012 16:55:08 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120111165508.GC1068@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1326293740-15735-6-git-send-email-daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>
On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 03:55:38PM +0100, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
> Remove the static variable saved_lpr1 defined in the header and
> define a structure to be common with all the functions.
> That will cleanly unify the function definitions.
I don't think this is in any way a correct way to do things.
> + struct ram_saved rs;
> @@ -49,9 +49,9 @@ static int at91_enter_idle(struct cpuidle_device *dev,
> else if (index == 1) {
> asm("b 1f; .align 5; 1:");
> asm("mcr p15, 0, r0, c7, c10, 4"); /* drain write buffer */
> - saved_lpr = sdram_selfrefresh_enable();
> + sdram_selfrefresh_enable(&rs);
What's the point of draining the write buffer if you then pass a buffer
to this function to write data to?
If the requirement is that the write buffer is drained before issue a
wait-for-interrupt instruction (in cpu_do_idle()) then this code
violates that.
That's why I went on in my discussion to a second solution.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-01-11 16:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-01-11 14:55 [PATCH 0/7] at91 : pm.h cleanups Daniel Lezcano
2012-01-11 14:55 ` [PATCH 1/7] at91 : coding style fixes Daniel Lezcano
2012-01-11 14:55 ` [PATCH 2/7] at91 : declare header name Daniel Lezcano
2012-01-11 14:55 ` [PATCH 3/7] at91 : group headers inclusion for the memory controller Daniel Lezcano
2012-01-11 14:55 ` [PATCH 4/7] at91 : convert pm.h macros to static inline functions Daniel Lezcano
2012-01-11 14:55 ` [PATCH 5/7] at91 : fix dirty hack for the selfrefresh function Daniel Lezcano
2012-01-11 15:10 ` Arnd Bergmann
2012-01-11 16:55 ` Russell King - ARM Linux [this message]
2012-01-11 18:27 ` Arnd Bergmann
2012-01-11 19:43 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2012-01-12 14:41 ` Nicolas Ferre
2012-01-12 19:36 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2012-01-13 0:38 ` Rob Lee
2012-01-13 9:29 ` Daniel Lezcano
2012-01-13 10:22 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2012-01-13 15:48 ` Arnd Bergmann
2012-01-13 17:25 ` Rob Lee
2012-01-11 14:55 ` [PATCH 6/7] at91 : group selfrefresh functions Daniel Lezcano
2012-01-11 16:56 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2012-01-11 14:55 ` [PATCH 7/7] at91 : fix compilation warning Daniel Lezcano
2012-01-11 15:23 ` [PATCH 0/7] at91 : pm.h cleanups Arnd Bergmann
2012-01-11 16:29 ` Daniel Lezcano
2012-01-23 6:29 ` Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD
2012-01-11 16:57 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20120111165508.GC1068@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk \
--to=linux@arm.linux.org.uk \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).