Messages in this thread | | | From | Andy Shevchenko <> | Date | Fri, 22 Oct 2021 17:49:04 +0300 | Subject | Re: [PATCH v2 09/16] reset: starfive-jh7100: Add StarFive JH7100 reset driver |
| |
On Fri, Oct 22, 2021 at 5:25 PM Emil Renner Berthing <kernel@esmil.dk> wrote: > On Fri, 22 Oct 2021 at 15:39, Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 22, 2021 at 4:35 PM Emil Renner Berthing <kernel@esmil.dk> wrote: > > > On Fri, 22 Oct 2021 at 14:56, Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Thu, Oct 21, 2021 at 8:43 PM Emil Renner Berthing <kernel@esmil.dk> wrote:
...
> > > > Why all these ugly % 32 against constants? > > > > > > Because the JH7100_RST_ values goes higher than 31. There is a > > > BIT_MASK macro, but that does % BITS_PER_LONG and this is a 64bit > > > machine. > > > > And? It's exactly what you have to use! > > So you want me to use an unsigned long array or DECLARE_BITMAP and > juggle two different index and bit offsets?
What are the offsets of those status registers? AFAICS they are sequential 4 32-bit registers.
So bitmap is exactly what is suitable here, you are right! See gpio-xilinx and gpio-pca953x on how to use bitmaps in the GPIO drivers.
> Also is there a macro for handling that we'd then need 4 commas on > 32bit COMPILE_TEST and 2 commas on 64bit? > If you have some other way in mind you'll have to be a lot more explicit again. > > The point of the jh7100_reset_asserted array is that it exactly > mirrors the values of the status registers when the lines are > asserted. Maybe writing it like this would be more explicit: > > static const u32 jh7100_reset_asserted[4] = { > /* STATUS0 register */ > BIT(JH7100_RST_U74 % 32) | > BIT(JH7100_RST_VP6_DRESET % 32) | > BIT(JH7100_RST_VP6_BRESET % 32), > /* STATUS1 register */ > BIT(JH7100_RST_HIFI4_DRESET % 32) | > BIT(JH7100_RST_HIFI4_BRESET % 32), > /* STATUS2 register */ > BIT(JH7100_RST_E24 % 32), > /* STATUS3 register */ > 0, > };
-- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko
| |