On 7/27/18 7:38 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 11:51:56AM -0700, Atish Patra wrote:
Should we follow the same prefix for these functions?
either timer_riscv* or riscv_timer* ?
Apologies for overlooking this in my timer patch as wel
riscv_timer_* sounds saner to me, I can update that.
Thanks.
+ struct clock_event_device *evdev = this_cpu_ptr(&riscv_clock_event);
+
The comment about the purpose of clearing the interrupt in the original
patch is removed here. If that's intentional, it's fine.
I thought having that comment helps understanding the distinction between
clearing the timer interrupt in SBI call & here.
Yes, that was intentional. But given that I don't even understand why
not using an ABI for architectural interrupt source enable/disable maybe
I'm confused and should revisit that decision.
I tried adding a new SBI call to disable the interrupts. However, I
realized that it is not recommended to change the SBI unless absolutely
required.
Here is the PR & following discussion.
https://github.com/riscv/riscv-pk/pull/108
Regards,
Atish
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
