Hi Mark, On 28 March 2017 at 22:53, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@xxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi, > > On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 10:29:10PM +0800, Fu Wei wrote: >> On 28 March 2017 at 21:05, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@xxxxxxx> wrote: >> > Sorry for the delay; I have not had the time to focus on this as I would >> > like to. I'm happy with patches 1-4, but from patch 5 onwards, there's >> > one change I'd like to see. >> > >> > I'd prefer that mmio timer frame rame N was always stored at >> > arch_timer_mem::frame[N], rather than arch_timer_mem::frame[] being in >> > an arbitrary order. That will make arch_timer_mem_frame::frame_nr >> > redundant. >> > >> > To allow arch_timer_mem::frame[] this to be sparse, I'm happy to have a >> > bool arch_timer_mem_frame::valid field that we set when probing each >> > frame. Then we don't need arch_timer_mem::num_frames. >> > >> > This will make iterating over the frames far less confusing, and makes >> > it simple to detect when a frame number is erroneously reused. >> > >> > Otherwise, I'm largely happy to pick the rest and apply any fixups >> > myself. >> >> Great thanks for your feedback! >> I will follow your suggestion to improve my patches, then post it in a day. > > Thanks, that is much appreciated. > >> So I will rebase my patchset on arch-timer/gtdt branch of your REPO >> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mark/linux.git/log/?h=arch-timer/gtdt > > Yes please! The current HEAD should be: > > ebbfe8889cffa12f ("clocksource: arm_arch_timer: move arch_timer_needs_of_probing into DT init call"). Because there are some improvements on the first 4 patches, so I fetched your gtdt branch, then rebase my v23 to the arch-timer/cleanup Thanks for your help! :-) > > Thanks, > Mark. -- Best regards, Fu Wei Software Engineer Red Hat -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
