Hi,
I have a few comments.
On Thu, Jun 06, 2013 at 12:01:25PM +0100, Chander Kashyap wrote:
> Extend the local timer interrupt support for handling four local timers.
Is this the maximum number of CPUs the MCT could theoretically support?
>
> Signed-off-by: Chander Kashyap <chander.kashyap@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/clocksource/exynos_mct.c | 33 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
> 1 file changed, 30 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/clocksource/exynos_mct.c b/drivers/clocksource/exynos_mct.c
> index 662fcc0..6af17d4 100644
> --- a/drivers/clocksource/exynos_mct.c
> +++ b/drivers/clocksource/exynos_mct.c
> @@ -412,6 +412,18 @@ static struct irqaction mct_tick1_event_irq = {
> .handler = exynos4_mct_tick_isr,
> };
>
> +static struct irqaction mct_tick2_event_irq = {
> + .name = "mct_tick2_irq",
> + .flags = IRQF_TIMER | IRQF_NOBALANCING,
> + .handler = exynos4_mct_tick_isr,
> +};
> +
> +static struct irqaction mct_tick3_event_irq = {
> + .name = "mct_tick3_irq",
> + .flags = IRQF_TIMER | IRQF_NOBALANCING,
> + .handler = exynos4_mct_tick_isr,
> +};
> +
Is there any reason you can't use {request,free}_irq?
> static int __cpuinit exynos4_local_timer_setup(struct clock_event_device *evt)
> {
> struct mct_clock_event_device *mevt;
> @@ -439,11 +451,21 @@ static int __cpuinit exynos4_local_timer_setup(struct clock_event_device *evt)
> mct_tick0_event_irq.dev_id = mevt;
> evt->irq = mct_irqs[MCT_L0_IRQ];
> setup_irq(evt->irq, &mct_tick0_event_irq);
> - } else {
> + } else if (cpu == 1) {
> mct_tick1_event_irq.dev_id = mevt;
> evt->irq = mct_irqs[MCT_L1_IRQ];
> setup_irq(evt->irq, &mct_tick1_event_irq);
> irq_set_affinity(evt->irq, cpumask_of(1));
> + } else if (cpu == 2) {
> + mct_tick2_event_irq.dev_id = mevt;
> + evt->irq = mct_irqs[MCT_L2_IRQ];
> + setup_irq(evt->irq, &mct_tick2_event_irq);
> + irq_set_affinity(evt->irq, cpumask_of(2));
> + } else if (cpu == 3) {
> + mct_tick3_event_irq.dev_id = mevt;
> + evt->irq = mct_irqs[MCT_L3_IRQ];
> + setup_irq(evt->irq, &mct_tick3_event_irq);
> + irq_set_affinity(evt->irq, cpumask_of(3));
This doesn't seem good to me. You're duplicating the logic for each CPU. Can
you not figure out which values you need based on the smp_processor_id (or even
better, the *evt) without requiring a separate branch for each CPU?
> }
> } else {
> enable_percpu_irq(mct_irqs[MCT_L0_IRQ], 0);
> @@ -456,11 +478,16 @@ static void exynos4_local_timer_stop(struct clock_event_device *evt)
> {
> unsigned int cpu = smp_processor_id();
> evt->set_mode(CLOCK_EVT_MODE_UNUSED, evt);
> - if (mct_int_type == MCT_INT_SPI)
> + if (mct_int_type == MCT_INT_SPI) {
> if (cpu == 0)
> remove_irq(evt->irq, &mct_tick0_event_irq);
> - else
> + else if (cpu == 1)
> remove_irq(evt->irq, &mct_tick1_event_irq);
> + else if (cpu == 2)
> + remove_irq(evt->irq, &mct_tick2_event_irq);
> + else if (cpu == 3)
> + remove_irq(evt->irq, &mct_tick3_event_irq);
> + }
Again, I don't think each CPU should be special-cased. If you used
{request,free}_irq this would be simpler.
Thanks,
Mark.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
