Hi Will, On 25 July 2016 at 23:31, Will Deacon <will.deacon@xxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, Jul 25, 2016 at 11:27:02PM +0800, fu.wei@xxxxxxxxxx wrote: >> From: Fu Wei <fu.wei@xxxxxxxxxx> >> >> This patch simplify arch_counter_get_cntvct_mem function by >> using readq to get 64-bit CNTVCT value instead of readl_relaxed. >> >> Signed-off-by: Fu Wei <fu.wei@xxxxxxxxxx> >> --- >> drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c | 10 +--------- >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 9 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c b/drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c >> index e6fd42d..483d2f9 100644 >> --- a/drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c >> +++ b/drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c >> @@ -418,15 +418,7 @@ u32 arch_timer_get_rate(void) >> >> static u64 arch_counter_get_cntvct_mem(void) >> { >> - u32 vct_lo, vct_hi, tmp_hi; >> - >> - do { >> - vct_hi = readl_relaxed(arch_counter_base + CNTVCT_HI); >> - vct_lo = readl_relaxed(arch_counter_base + CNTVCT_LO); >> - tmp_hi = readl_relaxed(arch_counter_base + CNTVCT_HI); >> - } while (vct_hi != tmp_hi); >> - >> - return ((u64) vct_hi << 32) | vct_lo; >> + return readq(arch_counter_base + CNTVCT_LO); > > Please drop this patch. It doesn't work. I am OK to drop this, but could you let me know why it doesn't work? I did get some problem on Foundation model about readq, but it works on Seattle. I guess that is a problem of model, but not a code problem. So I just got confused, why readq doesn't work, :-) > > http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2016-July/445369.html I just replied to it, sorry. > > Will -- Best regards, Fu Wei Software Engineer Red Hat -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-watchdog" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html