From: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>
To: Doug Anderson <dianders@chromium.org>
Cc: Heiko Stuebner <heiko@sntech.de>,
Chris Zhong <zyw@rock-chips.com>,
Kevin Hilman <khilman@linaro.org>,
Sonny Rao <sonnyrao@chromium.org>,
Tomasz Figa <tomasz.figa@gmail.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org, russ.dill@gmail.com,
olof@lixom.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: rockchip: Convert resume code to C
Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2014 22:50:57 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20141201225057.GA11285@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1417461694-5129-1-git-send-email-dianders@chromium.org>
On Mon, Dec 01, 2014 at 11:21:34AM -0800, Doug Anderson wrote:
> We convert the existing assembly resume code into C as proof that this
> works and to prepare for linking in SDRAM reinit code.
...
> base my patch atop them. Why?
^^^^
That's a very good question...
> +static void __noreturn rk3288_resume_c(void)
> +{
> + if (rk3288_resume_params.l2ctlr_f)
> + asm("mcr p15, 1, %0, c9, c0, 2" : :
> + "r" (rk3288_resume_params.l2ctlr));
Assembly...
> +static void __naked __noreturn rk3288_resume(void)
> +{
> + /* Make sure we're on CPU0, no IRQs and get a stack setup */
> + asm volatile (
> + "msr cpsr_cxf, %0\n"
> +
> + /* Only cpu0 continues to run, the others halt here */
> + "mrc p15, 0, r1, c0, c0, 5\n"
> + "and r1, r1, #0xf\n"
> + "cmp r1, #0\n"
> + "beq cpu0run\n"
> + "secondary_loop:\n"
> + "wfe\n"
> + "b secondary_loop\n"
> +
> + "cpu0run:\n"
> + "mov sp, %1\n"
> + :
> + : "i" (INIT_CPSR), "r" (&__stack_start)
> + : "cc", "r1", "sp");
Big load of assembly.
What I see here is a load of complexity which achieves very little.
The result doesn't get rid of much assembly, but it does make stuff
more complicated. And the diffstat speaks volumes about this:
10 files changed, 275 insertions(+), 94 deletions(-)
There's a lot of words in the description, but it's missing the most
important bit: why do we want to take this approach - what benefits
does it bring?
--
FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line: currently at 9.5Mbps down 400kbps up
according to speedtest.net.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-12-01 22:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-12-01 19:21 Doug Anderson
2014-12-01 22:50 ` Russell King - ARM Linux [this message]
2014-12-01 23:04 ` Doug Anderson
2014-12-02 9:33 ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-12-02 13:34 ` Linus Walleij
2014-12-02 17:36 ` Doug Anderson
2014-12-03 13:21 ` Linus Walleij
2014-12-03 16:44 ` Doug Anderson
2014-12-03 16:49 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2014-12-03 16:59 ` Doug Anderson
2014-12-03 14:42 ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-12-03 16:57 ` Doug Anderson
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20141201225057.GA11285@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk \
--to=linux@arm.linux.org.uk \
--cc=dianders@chromium.org \
--cc=heiko@sntech.de \
--cc=khilman@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=olof@lixom.net \
--cc=russ.dill@gmail.com \
--cc=sonnyrao@chromium.org \
--cc=tomasz.figa@gmail.com \
--cc=zyw@rock-chips.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®