Hello Chen-Yu, On Wed, 18 Apr 2018 18:05:03 +0800 Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 4:45 PM, Maxime Ripard > <maxime.ripard@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 07:25:15PM +0800, Chen-Yu Tsai wrote: > >> On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 7:17 PM, Maxime Ripard > >> <maxime.ripard@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 11:12:41AM +0800, Chen-Yu Tsai wrote: > >> >> On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 5:50 AM, Mylène Josserand > >> >> <mylene.josserand@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> >> > Move the assembly code for cluster cache enabling and resuming > >> >> > into an assembly file instead of having it directly in C code. > >> >> > > >> >> > Remove the CFLAGS because we are using the ARM directive "arch" > >> >> > instead. > >> >> > > >> >> > Signed-off-by: Mylène Josserand <mylene.josserand@xxxxxxxxxxx> > >> >> > --- > >> >> > arch/arm/mach-sunxi/Makefile | 4 +-- > >> >> > arch/arm/mach-sunxi/headsmp.S | 80 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > >> >> > arch/arm/mach-sunxi/mc_smp.c | 82 +++---------------------------------------- > >> >> > 3 files changed, 85 insertions(+), 81 deletions(-) > >> >> > create mode 100644 arch/arm/mach-sunxi/headsmp.S > >> >> > >> >> I'm still not convinced about this whole "move ASM to separate > >> >> file" thing, especially now that you aren't actually adding any > >> >> sunxi-specific ASM code beyond a simple function call. > >> >> > >> >> Could you drop this for now? > >> > > >> > I'd really like to have this merged actually. There's a significant > >> > readibility improvement, so even if there's no particular functional > >> > improvement, I'd still call it a win. > >> > >> What parts do you consider hard to read? The extra quotes? Trailing > >> newline? Or perhaps the __stringify bits? > > > > All of this, plus the clobbers and operands. > > Ok. Lets move it then. Ok, I will not drop this patch then. > > The kbuild reports indicate this still needs some work though. Yes, this is "normal" because the patch, that I depend on, is not applied yet (even if my cover-letter can let think that, it is not the case, sorry). It is applied on Broadcom ARM SoC since Tuesday: https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/2/23/1263 https://github.com/Broadcom/stblinux/commits/soc/next With this patch, it should fix the errors reported by kbuild. Best regards, -- Mylène Josserand, Bootlin (formerly Free Electrons) Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering http://bootlin.com
