Messages in this thread | | | From | Doug Anderson <> | Date | Tue, 14 Apr 2020 11:46:19 -0700 | Subject | Re: [PATCH] soc: qcom: rpmh-rsc: Factor "tcs_reg_addr" and "tcs_cmd_addr" calculation |
| |
Hi,
On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 10:58 AM Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> wrote: > > On Tue, 2020-04-14 at 10:41 -0700, Douglas Anderson wrote: > > We can make some of the register access functions more readable by > > factoring out the calculations a little bit. > > unrelated trivia: > > > diff --git a/drivers/soc/qcom/rpmh-rsc.c b/drivers/soc/qcom/rpmh-rsc.c > [] > > static void write_tcs_reg_sync(struct rsc_drv *drv, int reg, int tcs_id, > > u32 data) > > { > > - writel(data, drv->tcs_base + RSC_DRV_TCS_OFFSET * tcs_id + reg); > > + writel(data, tcs_reg_addr(drv, reg, tcs_id)); > > for (;;) { > > - if (data == readl(drv->tcs_base + reg + > > - RSC_DRV_TCS_OFFSET * tcs_id)) > > + if (data == readl(tcs_reg_addr(drv, reg, tcs_id))) > > break; > > udelay(1); > > } > > There a lockup potential here. > > It might be better to use some max loop counter with > an error/warning emitted instead of a continuous retry.
Yeah, I noticed that too but I assumed that it was probably OK. I think in this case it's really just confirming that the write made it across the bus since it's checking the same bit that it's writing. ...but I wouldn't be opposed to this changing to use readl_poll_timeout().
-Doug
| |