From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: linux@arm.linux.org.uk (Russell King - ARM Linux) Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2015 10:16:45 +0000 Subject: [PATCH v4 05/13] pm: at91: move the copying the sram function to the sram initializationi phase In-Reply-To: References: <1422409172-24178-1-git-send-email-wenyou.yang@atmel.com> <1422409396-24394-1-git-send-email-wenyou.yang@atmel.com> <20150129112800.GV26493@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> Message-ID: <20150130101645.GH26493@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 06:59:58AM +0000, Yang, Wenyou wrote: > Hi Russell, > > Thank you for your review. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Russell King - ARM Linux [mailto:linux at arm.linux.org.uk] > > > > On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 09:43:16AM +0800, Wenyou Yang wrote: > > > @@ -272,6 +268,9 @@ static void __init at91_pm_sram_init(void) > > > sram_pbase = gen_pool_virt_to_phys(sram_pool, sram_base); > > > slow_clock = __arm_ioremap_exec(sram_pbase, at91_slow_clock_sz, > > > false); > > > > > > + /* Copy the slow_clock handler to SRAM */ > > > + memcpy(slow_clock, at91_slow_clock, at91_slow_clock_sz); > > > + > > > > Why is this code not using the fncpy() support for copying functions. > At first, used the fncpy(), but it work not well on the some chip. I > will check it again. Please report on this; why does it "work not well" ? -- FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line: currently at 10.5Mbps down 400kbps up according to speedtest.net.