[PATCH] ARM: shmobile: Armadillo800EVA-reference: Remove usage of shmobile_timer

[PATCH] ARM: shmobile: Armadillo800EVA-reference: Remove usage of shmobile_timer

[Bastian Hecht]

The struct sys_timer is gone since the patch "ARM: delete struct
sys_timer". Since then we can't use shmobile_timer any longer. Setting
.init_time directly to eva_earlytimer_init fixes the resulting compile
error and makes the code shorter as well.

Signed-off-by: Bastian Hecht <hechtb+renesas@gmail.com>
---
 .../board-armadillo800eva-reference.c              |   12 ++----------
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-shmobile/board-armadillo800eva-reference.c b/arch/arm/mach-shmobile/board-armadillo800eva-reference.c
index 623754d..ae20979 100644
--- a/arch/arm/mach-shmobile/board-armadillo800eva-reference.c
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-shmobile/board-armadillo800eva-reference.c
@@ -219,14 +219,6 @@ static void __init eva_earlytimer_init(void)
 	eva_clock_init();
 }
 
-static void __init eva_add_early_devices(void)
-{
-	r8a7740_add_early_devices_dt();
-
-	/* override timer setup with board-specific code */
-	shmobile_timer.init = eva_earlytimer_init;
-}
-
 #define RESCNT2 IOMEM(0xe6188020)
 static void eva_restart(char mode, const char *cmd)
 {
@@ -241,13 +233,13 @@ static const char *eva_boards_compat_dt[] __initdata = {
 
 DT_MACHINE_START(ARMADILLO800EVA_DT, "armadillo800eva-reference")
 	.map_io		= r8a7740_map_io,
-	.init_early	= eva_add_early_devices,
+	.init_early	= r8a7740_add_early_devices_dt,
 	.init_irq	= r8a7740_init_irq_of,
 	.nr_irqs	= NR_IRQS_LEGACY,
 	.handle_irq	= shmobile_handle_irq_intc,
 	.init_machine	= eva_init,
 	.init_late	= shmobile_init_late,
-	.init_time	= shmobile_timer_init,
+	.init_time	= eva_earlytimer_init,
 	.dt_compat	= eva_boards_compat_dt,
 	.restart	= eva_restart,
 MACHINE_END
-- 
1.7.9.5

Re: [PATCH] ARM: shmobile: Armadillo800EVA-reference: Remove usage of shmobile_timer

[Kuninori Morimoto]

Hi Bastian

> The struct sys_timer is gone since the patch "ARM: delete struct
> sys_timer". Since then we can't use shmobile_timer any longer. Setting
> .init_time directly to eva_earlytimer_init fixes the resulting compile
> error and makes the code shorter as well.

I guess it is 6bb27d7349db51b50c40534710fe164ca0d58902
Can you please add commit number too ?
It is easy to check.

something like

the patch "ARM: delete struct sys_timer"
(6bb27d7349db51b50c40534710fe164ca0d58902)


> 
> Signed-off-by: Bastian Hecht <hechtb+renesas@gmail.com>
> ---
>  .../board-armadillo800eva-reference.c              |   12 ++----------
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-shmobile/board-armadillo800eva-reference.c b/arch/arm/mach-shmobile/board-armadillo800eva-reference.c
> index 623754d..ae20979 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/mach-shmobile/board-armadillo800eva-reference.c
> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-shmobile/board-armadillo800eva-reference.c
> @@ -219,14 +219,6 @@ static void __init eva_earlytimer_init(void)
>  	eva_clock_init();
>  }
>  
> -static void __init eva_add_early_devices(void)
> -{
> -	r8a7740_add_early_devices_dt();
> -
> -	/* override timer setup with board-specific code */
> -	shmobile_timer.init = eva_earlytimer_init;
> -}
> -
>  #define RESCNT2 IOMEM(0xe6188020)
>  static void eva_restart(char mode, const char *cmd)
>  {
> @@ -241,13 +233,13 @@ static const char *eva_boards_compat_dt[] __initdata = {
>  
>  DT_MACHINE_START(ARMADILLO800EVA_DT, "armadillo800eva-reference")
>  	.map_io		= r8a7740_map_io,
> -	.init_early	= eva_add_early_devices,
> +	.init_early	= r8a7740_add_early_devices_dt,
>  	.init_irq	= r8a7740_init_irq_of,
>  	.nr_irqs	= NR_IRQS_LEGACY,
>  	.handle_irq	= shmobile_handle_irq_intc,
>  	.init_machine	= eva_init,
>  	.init_late	= shmobile_init_late,
> -	.init_time	= shmobile_timer_init,
> +	.init_time	= eva_earlytimer_init,
>  	.dt_compat	= eva_boards_compat_dt,
>  	.restart	= eva_restart,
>  MACHINE_END
> -- 
> 1.7.9.5
> 
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-sh" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html


Best regards
---
Kuninori Morimoto

Re: [PATCH] ARM: shmobile: Armadillo800EVA-reference: Remove usage of shmobile_timer

[Simon Horman]

On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 03:38:10PM -0600, Bastian Hecht wrote:
> The struct sys_timer is gone since the patch "ARM: delete struct
> sys_timer". Since then we can't use shmobile_timer any longer. Setting
> .init_time directly to eva_earlytimer_init fixes the resulting compile
> error and makes the code shorter as well.

Hi Bastian,

Magnus seems to be very keen on the idea that -reference code
shouldn't use early timer or early devices if possible.

Is it possible to re-work this patch so that armadillo800eva-reference
doesn't use early timer?

> 
> Signed-off-by: Bastian Hecht <hechtb+renesas@gmail.com>
> ---
>  .../board-armadillo800eva-reference.c              |   12 ++----------
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-shmobile/board-armadillo800eva-reference.c b/arch/arm/mach-shmobile/board-armadillo800eva-reference.c
> index 623754d..ae20979 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/mach-shmobile/board-armadillo800eva-reference.c
> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-shmobile/board-armadillo800eva-reference.c
> @@ -219,14 +219,6 @@ static void __init eva_earlytimer_init(void)
>  	eva_clock_init();
>  }
>  
> -static void __init eva_add_early_devices(void)
> -{
> -	r8a7740_add_early_devices_dt();
> -
> -	/* override timer setup with board-specific code */
> -	shmobile_timer.init = eva_earlytimer_init;
> -}
> -
>  #define RESCNT2 IOMEM(0xe6188020)
>  static void eva_restart(char mode, const char *cmd)
>  {
> @@ -241,13 +233,13 @@ static const char *eva_boards_compat_dt[] __initdata = {
>  
>  DT_MACHINE_START(ARMADILLO800EVA_DT, "armadillo800eva-reference")
>  	.map_io		= r8a7740_map_io,
> -	.init_early	= eva_add_early_devices,
> +	.init_early	= r8a7740_add_early_devices_dt,
>  	.init_irq	= r8a7740_init_irq_of,
>  	.nr_irqs	= NR_IRQS_LEGACY,
>  	.handle_irq	= shmobile_handle_irq_intc,
>  	.init_machine	= eva_init,
>  	.init_late	= shmobile_init_late,
> -	.init_time	= shmobile_timer_init,
> +	.init_time	= eva_earlytimer_init,
>  	.dt_compat	= eva_boards_compat_dt,
>  	.restart	= eva_restart,
>  MACHINE_END
> -- 
> 1.7.9.5
> 

Re: [PATCH] ARM: shmobile: Armadillo800EVA-reference: Remove usage of shmobile_timer

[Bastian Hecht]

Hi Simon,

2013/2/18 Simon Horman <horms@verge.net.au>:
> On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 03:38:10PM -0600, Bastian Hecht wrote:
>> The struct sys_timer is gone since the patch "ARM: delete struct
>> sys_timer". Since then we can't use shmobile_timer any longer. Setting
>> .init_time directly to eva_earlytimer_init fixes the resulting compile
>> error and makes the code shorter as well.
>
> Hi Bastian,
>
> Magnus seems to be very keen on the idea that -reference code
> shouldn't use early timer or early devices if possible.
>
> Is it possible to re-work this patch so that armadillo800eva-reference
> doesn't use early timer?

Hmm I wonder if this is just a naming convention here. If I rename
eva_earlytimer_init() to eva_timer_init() the only thing that might
disturb us is that we call shmobile_EARLYtimer_init() inside it. But
this function only sets a callback named LATE_time_init. So we don't
break any timings.

So are you ok if I rename eva_earlytimer_init() to eva_timer_init()?

Thanks,

 Bastian


>>
>> Signed-off-by: Bastian Hecht <hechtb+renesas@gmail.com>
>> ---
>>  .../board-armadillo800eva-reference.c              |   12 ++----------
>>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-shmobile/board-armadillo800eva-reference.c b/arch/arm/mach-shmobile/board-armadillo800eva-reference.c
>> index 623754d..ae20979 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-shmobile/board-armadillo800eva-reference.c
>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-shmobile/board-armadillo800eva-reference.c
>> @@ -219,14 +219,6 @@ static void __init eva_earlytimer_init(void)
>>       eva_clock_init();
>>  }
>>
>> -static void __init eva_add_early_devices(void)
>> -{
>> -     r8a7740_add_early_devices_dt();
>> -
>> -     /* override timer setup with board-specific code */
>> -     shmobile_timer.init = eva_earlytimer_init;
>> -}
>> -
>>  #define RESCNT2 IOMEM(0xe6188020)
>>  static void eva_restart(char mode, const char *cmd)
>>  {
>> @@ -241,13 +233,13 @@ static const char *eva_boards_compat_dt[] __initdata = {
>>
>>  DT_MACHINE_START(ARMADILLO800EVA_DT, "armadillo800eva-reference")
>>       .map_io         = r8a7740_map_io,
>> -     .init_early     = eva_add_early_devices,
>> +     .init_early     = r8a7740_add_early_devices_dt,
>>       .init_irq       = r8a7740_init_irq_of,
>>       .nr_irqs        = NR_IRQS_LEGACY,
>>       .handle_irq     = shmobile_handle_irq_intc,
>>       .init_machine   = eva_init,
>>       .init_late      = shmobile_init_late,
>> -     .init_time      = shmobile_timer_init,
>> +     .init_time      = eva_earlytimer_init,
>>       .dt_compat      = eva_boards_compat_dt,
>>       .restart        = eva_restart,
>>  MACHINE_END
>> --
>> 1.7.9.5
>>

Re: [PATCH] ARM: shmobile: Armadillo800EVA-reference: Remove usage of shmobile_timer

[Simon Horman]

On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 09:05:16AM -0600, Bastian Hecht wrote:
> Hi Simon,
> 
> 2013/2/18 Simon Horman <horms@verge.net.au>:
> > On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 03:38:10PM -0600, Bastian Hecht wrote:
> >> The struct sys_timer is gone since the patch "ARM: delete struct
> >> sys_timer". Since then we can't use shmobile_timer any longer. Setting
> >> .init_time directly to eva_earlytimer_init fixes the resulting compile
> >> error and makes the code shorter as well.
> >
> > Hi Bastian,
> >
> > Magnus seems to be very keen on the idea that -reference code
> > shouldn't use early timer or early devices if possible.
> >
> > Is it possible to re-work this patch so that armadillo800eva-reference
> > doesn't use early timer?
> 
> Hmm I wonder if this is just a naming convention here. If I rename
> eva_earlytimer_init() to eva_timer_init() the only thing that might
> disturb us is that we call shmobile_EARLYtimer_init() inside it. But
> this function only sets a callback named LATE_time_init. So we don't
> break any timings.
> 
> So are you ok if I rename eva_earlytimer_init() to eva_timer_init()?

Perhaps I am missing something.

In eva_earlytimer_init() I see a call to shmobile_earlytimer_init()
amongst other things. And this seems to be the kind of early timer
initialisation that Magnus has asked -reference code not to use.

If you look at the setup code in setup-emev2.c and in particular
the use and contents emev2_init_delay() then you can see the kind of setup
that Magnus is advocating.

This is also reflected in "[PATCH v2 0/8] ARM: shmobile: kzm9g reference
SMP and cleanup". In particular:

* [PATCH v2 5/8] ARM: shmobile: sh73a0: Do not use early devices with DT reference
* [PATCH v2 6/8] ARM: shmobile: kzm9g: Do not use early devices

Re: [PATCH] ARM: shmobile: Armadillo800EVA-reference: Remove usage of shmobile_timer

[Bastian Hecht]

Hi Simon,

2013/2/22 Simon Horman <horms@verge.net.au>:
> On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 09:05:16AM -0600, Bastian Hecht wrote:
>> Hi Simon,
>>
>> 2013/2/18 Simon Horman <horms@verge.net.au>:
>> > On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 03:38:10PM -0600, Bastian Hecht wrote:
>> >> The struct sys_timer is gone since the patch "ARM: delete struct
>> >> sys_timer". Since then we can't use shmobile_timer any longer. Setting
>> >> .init_time directly to eva_earlytimer_init fixes the resulting compile
>> >> error and makes the code shorter as well.
>> >
>> > Hi Bastian,
>> >
>> > Magnus seems to be very keen on the idea that -reference code
>> > shouldn't use early timer or early devices if possible.
>> >
>> > Is it possible to re-work this patch so that armadillo800eva-reference
>> > doesn't use early timer?
>>
>> Hmm I wonder if this is just a naming convention here. If I rename
>> eva_earlytimer_init() to eva_timer_init() the only thing that might
>> disturb us is that we call shmobile_EARLYtimer_init() inside it. But
>> this function only sets a callback named LATE_time_init. So we don't
>> break any timings.
>>
>> So are you ok if I rename eva_earlytimer_init() to eva_timer_init()?
>
> Perhaps I am missing something.
>
> In eva_earlytimer_init() I see a call to shmobile_earlytimer_init()
> amongst other things. And this seems to be the kind of early timer
> initialisation that Magnus has asked -reference code not to use.
>
> If you look at the setup code in setup-emev2.c and in particular
> the use and contents emev2_init_delay() then you can see the kind of setup
> that Magnus is advocating.
>
> This is also reflected in "[PATCH v2 0/8] ARM: shmobile: kzm9g reference
> SMP and cleanup". In particular:
>
> * [PATCH v2 5/8] ARM: shmobile: sh73a0: Do not use early devices with DT reference
> * [PATCH v2 6/8] ARM: shmobile: kzm9g: Do not use early devices

Thanks for guidance to these patches! On which branch does this
patchset apply? Or are they even already applied on some publicly
available branch?

Cheers,
 Bastian

Re: [PATCH] ARM: shmobile: Armadillo800EVA-reference: Remove usage of shmobile_timer

[Simon Horman]

On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 10:32:17AM -0600, Bastian Hecht wrote:
> Hi Simon,
> 
> 2013/2/22 Simon Horman <horms@verge.net.au>:
> > On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 09:05:16AM -0600, Bastian Hecht wrote:
> >> Hi Simon,
> >>
> >> 2013/2/18 Simon Horman <horms@verge.net.au>:
> >> > On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 03:38:10PM -0600, Bastian Hecht wrote:
> >> >> The struct sys_timer is gone since the patch "ARM: delete struct
> >> >> sys_timer". Since then we can't use shmobile_timer any longer. Setting
> >> >> .init_time directly to eva_earlytimer_init fixes the resulting compile
> >> >> error and makes the code shorter as well.
> >> >
> >> > Hi Bastian,
> >> >
> >> > Magnus seems to be very keen on the idea that -reference code
> >> > shouldn't use early timer or early devices if possible.
> >> >
> >> > Is it possible to re-work this patch so that armadillo800eva-reference
> >> > doesn't use early timer?
> >>
> >> Hmm I wonder if this is just a naming convention here. If I rename
> >> eva_earlytimer_init() to eva_timer_init() the only thing that might
> >> disturb us is that we call shmobile_EARLYtimer_init() inside it. But
> >> this function only sets a callback named LATE_time_init. So we don't
> >> break any timings.
> >>
> >> So are you ok if I rename eva_earlytimer_init() to eva_timer_init()?
> >
> > Perhaps I am missing something.
> >
> > In eva_earlytimer_init() I see a call to shmobile_earlytimer_init()
> > amongst other things. And this seems to be the kind of early timer
> > initialisation that Magnus has asked -reference code not to use.
> >
> > If you look at the setup code in setup-emev2.c and in particular
> > the use and contents emev2_init_delay() then you can see the kind of setup
> > that Magnus is advocating.
> >
> > This is also reflected in "[PATCH v2 0/8] ARM: shmobile: kzm9g reference
> > SMP and cleanup". In particular:
> >
> > * [PATCH v2 5/8] ARM: shmobile: sh73a0: Do not use early devices with DT reference
> > * [PATCH v2 6/8] ARM: shmobile: kzm9g: Do not use early devices
> 
> Thanks for guidance to these patches! On which branch does this
> patchset apply? Or are they even already applied on some publicly
> available branch?

These changes should be present in both next and topic/all+next.

Re: [PATCH] ARM: shmobile: Armadillo800EVA-reference: Remove usage of shmobile_timer

[Bastian Hecht]

2013/2/28 Simon Horman <horms@verge.net.au>:
> On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 10:32:17AM -0600, Bastian Hecht wrote:
>> Hi Simon,
>>
>> 2013/2/22 Simon Horman <horms@verge.net.au>:
>> > On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 09:05:16AM -0600, Bastian Hecht wrote:
>> >> Hi Simon,
>> >>
>> >> 2013/2/18 Simon Horman <horms@verge.net.au>:
>> >> > On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 03:38:10PM -0600, Bastian Hecht wrote:
>> >> >> The struct sys_timer is gone since the patch "ARM: delete struct
>> >> >> sys_timer". Since then we can't use shmobile_timer any longer. Setting
>> >> >> .init_time directly to eva_earlytimer_init fixes the resulting compile
>> >> >> error and makes the code shorter as well.
>> >> >
>> >> > Hi Bastian,
>> >> >
>> >> > Magnus seems to be very keen on the idea that -reference code
>> >> > shouldn't use early timer or early devices if possible.
>> >> >
>> >> > Is it possible to re-work this patch so that armadillo800eva-reference
>> >> > doesn't use early timer?
>> >>
>> >> Hmm I wonder if this is just a naming convention here. If I rename
>> >> eva_earlytimer_init() to eva_timer_init() the only thing that might
>> >> disturb us is that we call shmobile_EARLYtimer_init() inside it. But
>> >> this function only sets a callback named LATE_time_init. So we don't
>> >> break any timings.
>> >>
>> >> So are you ok if I rename eva_earlytimer_init() to eva_timer_init()?
>> >
>> > Perhaps I am missing something.
>> >
>> > In eva_earlytimer_init() I see a call to shmobile_earlytimer_init()
>> > amongst other things. And this seems to be the kind of early timer
>> > initialisation that Magnus has asked -reference code not to use.
>> >
>> > If you look at the setup code in setup-emev2.c and in particular
>> > the use and contents emev2_init_delay() then you can see the kind of setup
>> > that Magnus is advocating.
>> >
>> > This is also reflected in "[PATCH v2 0/8] ARM: shmobile: kzm9g reference
>> > SMP and cleanup". In particular:
>> >
>> > * [PATCH v2 5/8] ARM: shmobile: sh73a0: Do not use early devices with DT reference
>> > * [PATCH v2 6/8] ARM: shmobile: kzm9g: Do not use early devices
>>
>> Thanks for guidance to these patches! On which branch does this
>> patchset apply? Or are they even already applied on some publicly
>> available branch?
>
> These changes should be present in both next and topic/all+next.

Yeah git remote update is my friend... thanks!

Ok I've prepared the patches. I think it would make sense to split it
into 2 parts and keep the first patch as it is and have a separate one
for removing all the early device stuff. I've prepared it in an
identical way as you cleaned up the code.
If you prefer 1 patch just tell me. Same if you want me to rebase
these patches on some specific branch.

Cheers,

 Bastian

[PATCH] ARM: shmobile: armadillo800eva-reference: fix compiler warning

[Guennadi Liakhovetski]

Fix the compiler warning:

arch/arm/mach-shmobile/board-armadillo800eva-reference.c:196:2: warning: initialization from incompatible pointer type [enabled by default]
arch/arm/mach-shmobile/board-armadillo800eva-reference.c:196:2: warning: (near initialization for '__mach_desc_ARMADILLO800EVA_DT.restart') [enabled by default]

While at it also remove superfluous parenthesis.

Signed-off-by: Guennadi Liakhovetski <g.liakhovetski+renesas@gmail.com>
---

renesas.git devel branch

 .../board-armadillo800eva-reference.c              |    4 ++--
 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-shmobile/board-armadillo800eva-reference.c b/arch/arm/mach-shmobile/board-armadillo800eva-reference.c
index 002d8d3..fd2446d 100644
--- a/arch/arm/mach-shmobile/board-armadillo800eva-reference.c
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-shmobile/board-armadillo800eva-reference.c
@@ -174,10 +174,10 @@ static void __init eva_init(void)
 }
 
 #define RESCNT2 IOMEM(0xe6188020)
-static void eva_restart(char mode, const char *cmd)
+static void eva_restart(enum reboot_mode mode, const char *cmd)
 {
 	/* Do soft power on reset */
-	writel((1 << 31), RESCNT2);
+	writel(1 << 31, RESCNT2);
 }
 
 static const char *eva_boards_compat_dt[] __initdata = {
-- 
1.7.2.5

Re: [PATCH] ARM: shmobile: armadillo800eva-reference: fix compiler warning

[Simon Horman]

On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 06:02:16PM +0200, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote:
> Fix the compiler warning:
> 
> arch/arm/mach-shmobile/board-armadillo800eva-reference.c:196:2: warning: initialization from incompatible pointer type [enabled by default]
> arch/arm/mach-shmobile/board-armadillo800eva-reference.c:196:2: warning: (near initialization for '__mach_desc_ARMADILLO800EVA_DT.restart') [enabled by default]
> 
> While at it also remove superfluous parenthesis.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Guennadi Liakhovetski <g.liakhovetski+renesas@gmail.com>

Thanks, I have queued this up for v3.12 in the fixes2-for-v3.12 branch.