Messages in this thread | | | From | "Yang, Wenyou" <> | Subject | RE: [PATCH v4 05/13] pm: at91: move the copying the sram function to the sram initializationi phase | Date | Fri, 30 Jan 2015 06:59:58 +0000 |
| |
Hi Russell,
Thank you for your review.
> -----Original Message----- > From: Russell King - ARM Linux [mailto:linux@arm.linux.org.uk] > Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2015 7:28 PM > To: Yang, Wenyou > Cc: Ferre, Nicolas; linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; linux- > kernel@vger.kernel.org; alexandre.belloni@free-electrons.com; > sylvain.rochet@finsecur.com; peda@axentia.se; > sergei.shtylyov@cogentembedded.com; linux@maxim.org.za > Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 05/13] pm: at91: move the copying the sram function to > the sram initializationi phase > > On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 09:43:16AM +0800, Wenyou Yang wrote: > > -#ifdef CONFIG_AT91_SLOW_CLOCK > > - /* copy slow_clock handler to SRAM, and call it */ > > - memcpy(slow_clock, at91_slow_clock, > at91_slow_clock_sz); > > -#endif > > slow_clock(at91_pmc_base, at91_ramc_base[0], > > at91_ramc_base[1], > > at91_pm_data.memctrl); > > @@ -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.
> Why is it not checking the return code from __arm_ioremap_exec() or > gen_pool_virt_to_phys() for failure? > > This looks like quite a massive review failure when this code was originally merged. > It needs fixing. I will fix it.
> > -- > FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line: currently at 10.5Mbps down 400kbps up > according to speedtest.net.
Best Regards, Wenyou Yang
| |