On Thursday 06 of June 2013 17:50:40 Mark Rutland wrote:
> 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.
+1 to all Mark's comments.
Best regards,
Tomasz
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-serial" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
