From: daniel.lezcano@linaro.org (Daniel Lezcano)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH] clocksource: sirf/marco+prima2: drop usage of CLOCK_TICK_RATE
Date: Thu, 28 Nov 2013 12:32:33 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <529729D1.7030803@linaro.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20131128091143.GT28642@pengutronix.de>
On 11/28/2013 10:11 AM, Uwe Kleine-K?nig wrote:
> Hello Daniel,
>
> On Thu, Nov 28, 2013 at 08:34:43AM +0100, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
>> On 11/26/2013 02:55 PM, Uwe Kleine-K?nig wrote:
>>> Hi Danial,
> ooops, sorry for the typo here,
>
>>>> Since CSR SiRF was converted to multi platform in cf82e0e (ARM:
>>>> sirf: enable multiplatform support) the symbol CLOCK_TICK_RATE
>>>> isn't the platform specific definition any more, but a global
>>>> dummy value. There was no harm introduced in cf82e0e because the
>>>> global value happens to match the old platform specific one,
>>>> still this dummy value isn't intended to be used and will
>>>> hopefully disappear soon, so introduce a local #define and use
>>>> that instead.
>>>>
>>>> So it's not urgent, but would be a nice cleanup for 3.14-rc1.
>>> I'd like to depend on this patch to drop CLOCK_TICK_RATE for
>>> mach-prima2. Would it be ok for you when I include it in a pull request
>>> to the arm-soc people? If not, do you intend to take that patch, or do
>>> you still have objections? In that case I'd back out mach-prima2 from my
>>> CLOCK_TICK_RATE change.
> Note that this would make prima2 the only platform that would need
> special handling as all other patches are ready now. So I'd really like
> to get that resolved soon.
>
>> I think it would be better to keep the macro name consistent and
>> redefine it in the file with a comment.
>>
>> /* over riding default value because bla bla */
>> #ifdef CLOCK_TICK_RATE
>> #undef CLOCK_TICK_RATE
>> #define CLOCK_TICK_RATE 100000
>> #endif
> Hmm, I don't like that. Redefining symbols might easily result in
> surprises. Moreover I want to completely get rid of CLOCK_TICK_RATE (for
> ARM at least), doing that redefinition makes this driver result in false
> positives when grepping for sites still using CLOCK_TICK_RATE.
>
>> So people reading the code won't have to scratch their head to
>> understand why CLOCK_FREQ is used instead of CLOCK_TICK_RATE. And
>> that will limit the impact in the code.
> IMHO this is shortsighted. Seeing only a snipplet of code using
> CLOCK_TICK_RATE might be easy to understand for someone who knows about
> CLOCK_TICK_RATE. But in fact thats an illusion because the code looks
> like using a global constant, but in fact it isn't. If the reader
> doesn't see the redefinition the value might differ from his
> expectations; also worse. Now add that the global CLOCK_TICK_RATE will
> die, so it will become less common that people know about
> CLOCK_TICK_RATE. Probably using a name that doesn't suggest it might be
> global (like MARCO_CLOCK_FREQ) is still better.
Yes, probably.
>> Alternatively, I am wondering if that shouldn't fall into the DT,
>> without the declaration in the DT, it defaults to 100000.
> I didn't check how the constant is used, but I agree it should be an
> overwritable default. Given that I don't care much about that driver but
> my intention is to get rid of <mach/timex.h> for all ARM platforms my
> motivation to add features to a driver I cannot even test is low.
Ok, I am waiting for a new version. The new changelog you proposed for
the patch sound more clear.
Thanks
-- Daniel
--
<http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org ? Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro> Facebook |
<http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg> Twitter |
<http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog/> Blog
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-11-28 11:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-11-11 20:20 [PATCH] clocksource: sirf/marco+prima2: drop usage of CLOCK_TICK_RATE Uwe Kleine-König
2013-11-13 20:00 ` Daniel Lezcano
2013-11-14 9:07 ` Uwe Kleine-König
2013-11-26 13:55 ` Uwe Kleine-König
2013-11-28 7:34 ` Daniel Lezcano
2013-11-28 9:11 ` Uwe Kleine-König
2013-11-28 11:32 ` Daniel Lezcano [this message]
2013-11-28 13:21 ` [PATCH v2] " Uwe Kleine-König
2013-12-04 8:52 ` Uwe Kleine-König
2013-12-04 9:13 ` Daniel Lezcano
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=529729D1.7030803@linaro.org \
--to=daniel.lezcano@linaro.org \
--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).