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 07:03:49 +0000 |
| |
Hi Alexandre,
> -----Original Message----- > From: Alexandre Belloni [mailto:alexandre.belloni@free-electrons.com] > Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2015 11:09 PM > To: Russell King - ARM Linux > Cc: Yang, Wenyou; Ferre, Nicolas; linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; linux- > kernel@vger.kernel.org; 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 > > Hi, > > On 29/01/2015 at 11:28:00 +0000, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote : > > 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. > > Indeed, this was done in the original version of the patch that I acked. Yes, in the original version used the fncpy(), but it works not well for some SoCs. Sorry for that, I forget to record it on the change log.
> > > Why is it not checking the return code from __arm_ioremap_exec() or > > gen_pool_virt_to_phys() for failure? > > gen_pool_virt_to_phys() will not fail as the chunk is allocated just before so it will > necessarily be found in the list. > > We need to reintroduce a check for slow_clock != NULL before fncpy() since it is > moved out of its original if block. > > -- > Alexandre Belloni, Free Electrons > Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering http://free-electrons.com
Best Regards, Wenyou yang
| |