Russell,
On 10/14/2014 04:37 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 02:50:07PM -0700, Kever Yang wrote:
>> Heiko,
>>
>> On 10/14/2014 02:23 PM, Heiko St?bner wrote:
>>> Am Dienstag, 14. Oktober 2014, 13:24:03 schrieb Doug Anderson:
>>>> Kever,
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 1:12 PM, Kever Yang <kever.yang at rock-chips.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>> + /*
>>>>> + * We need to soft reset the cpu when we turn off the cpu power
>>>>> domain, + * or else the active processors might be stalled when
>>>>> the individual + * processor is powered down.
>>>>> + */
>>>>> + if (read_cpuid_part_number() != ARM_CPU_PART_CORTEX_A9) {
>>>> I haven't done a full review of this patch, but it seems unlikely that
>>>> your uses of read_cpuid_part_number() and read_cpuid_part() in this
>>>> patch are correct. You use both functions and in both cases compare
>>>> the results to ARM_CPU_PART_CORTEX_A9.
>>> I think read_cpuid_part() would be the correct one, as it does
>> You are right, read_cpuid_part() is correct one on kernel next,
>> I mix up 3.14 kernel and next tree, only read_cpuid_part_number() is
>> available
>> in 3.14 kernel.
>>
>> I will correct it in my next version, any other changes needed for new
>> version?
> You need to at the _very_ _minimum_ build test your code against a
> recent kernel, and preferably test it to make sure that it works as
> you intend.
Thanks for you advice, I'll be more careful next time.
I'm sorry for not test this patch with rk3188(A9 based) board,
I do have test it on top of kernel next with my rk3288 evb(not A9 based),
and I didn't get any warning for read_cpuid_part_number()
during building the image.
- Kever
>
> Developing on such an old kernel version, and hoping that the code is
> going to be correct for later kernels isn't a nice idea.
>
