Hi Philipp:
On 2014?12?01? 20:04, Philipp Zabel wrote:
> Am Freitag, den 28.11.2014, 17:43 +0800 schrieb Andy Yan:
>> Hi Zabel:
>> On 2014?11?27? 00:34, Philipp Zabel wrote:
>>> Am Mittwoch, den 26.11.2014, 21:32 +0800 schrieb Andy Yan:
>>>> On rockchip rk3288, only word(32-bit) accesses are
>>>> permitted for hdmi registers. Byte width accesses (writeb,
>>>> readb) generate an imprecise external abort.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Andy Yan <andy.yan at rock-chips.com>
>>>>
>>>> ---
>>>>
>>>> Changes in v13: None
>>>> Changes in v12: None
>>>> Changes in v11: None
>>>> Changes in v10: None
>>>> Changes in v9: None
>>>> Changes in v8: None
>>>> Changes in v7: None
>>>> Changes in v6:
>>>> - refactor register access without reg_shift
>>>>
>>>> Changes in v5:
>>>> - refactor reg-io-width
>>>>
>>>> Changes in v4: None
>>>> Changes in v3:
>>>> - split multi-register access to one indepent patch
>>>>
>>>> drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/dw_hdmi.c | 57 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
>>>> 1 file changed, 51 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/dw_hdmi.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/dw_hdmi.c
>>>> index a53bf63..5e88c8d 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/dw_hdmi.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/dw_hdmi.c
>>>> @@ -100,6 +100,11 @@ struct hdmi_data_info {
>>>> struct hdmi_vmode video_mode;
>>>> };
>>>>
>>>> +union dw_reg_ptr {
>>>> + u32 __iomem *p32;
>>>> + u8 __iomem *p8;
>>>> +};
>>> I see no need to introduce this. Just explicitly multiply the offset in
>>> dw_hdmi_writel.
>>>
>> Is there any disadvantage to do like this?
>> The compiler can help us do the explicitly multiply by this way.
> Four additional lines, a new defined type, a few more changes to struct
> dw_hdmi and dw_hdmi_bind necessary.
>
> Technically I see no problem to let the compiler do the multiplication,
> my issue is that it ever so slightly obfuscates the code. Instead of
> just writing "* 4" in two functions, we get a new union that you need to
> know about when looking at struct dw_hdmi and dw_hdmi_bind, regs.p8 is
> used but never assigned directly, it's just a tiny bit of additional
> effort needed to understand the code. But when the cost to avoid that is
> so small...
>
> regards
> Philipp
>
What you said is right, I will change it in PATCH V15
thanks .
> _______________________________________________
> Linux-rockchip mailing list
> Linux-rockchip at lists.infradead.org
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-rockchip
