From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932652AbcALBeh (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 Jan 2016 20:34:37 -0500 Received: from mezzanine.sirena.org.uk ([106.187.55.193]:48432 "EHLO mezzanine.sirena.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1761766AbcALBef (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 Jan 2016 20:34:35 -0500 Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2016 01:34:21 +0000 From: Mark Brown To: Timur Tabi Cc: "Maciej S. Szmigiero" , Fabio Estevam , "alsa-devel@alsa-project.org" , Nicolin Chen , Xiubo Li , Liam Girdwood , "linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org" , linux-kernel Message-ID: <20160112013421.GW6588@sirena.org.uk> References: <5677107C.60904@maciej.szmigiero.name> <20160111140038.GC6588@sirena.org.uk> <5693B7CC.8000905@maciej.szmigiero.name> <20160111145430.GE6588@sirena.org.uk> <5693CE21.8010009@tabi.org> <20160111161225.GJ6588@sirena.org.uk> <569455AA.4060907@tabi.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="3BjoNV5KkjW1cxnK" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <569455AA.4060907@tabi.org> X-Cookie: APL hackers do it in the quad. User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 2a01:348:6:8808:fab::3 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: broonie@sirena.org.uk Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] ASoC: fsl_ssi: remove register defaults X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Mon, 26 Dec 2011 16:24:06 +0000) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mezzanine.sirena.org.uk) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org --3BjoNV5KkjW1cxnK Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 07:23:54PM -0600, Timur Tabi wrote: > Mark Brown wrote: > >regcache handles this fine, it's perfectly happy to just go and allocate > >the cache as registers get used (this is why the code that's doing the > >allocation exists...). What is causing problems here is that the first > >access to the register is happening in interrupt context so we can't do > >a GFP_KERNEL allocation for it. > Considering how small and not-sparse the SSI register space is, would using > REGCACHE_FLAT be appropriate? Quite possibly (it'll be more efficient and it's intended for such use cases) but as I said in my other reply that then has the issue that it implicitly gives default values to all the registers so I'd expect we still need to handle the cache initialisation explicitly (or alternatively the hardware sync with the cache on startup). --3BjoNV5KkjW1cxnK Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJWlFgcAAoJECTWi3JdVIfQ98IH/09zIC0Ay+fzOlGUIaKvTv2T +ezl3FG/dpKNjVXXI0Y613tHj8TL+515E6FSNqMAgo97g7Vmkm/vb5t8VFYUbp/U fbWjeUbklioDO1TmuQfBNQxY2YZ43Jw0Vq6TJk2B+oOY9y/R1WWhzuW/JieSWeJb mvrOrsroFSLqKQIj3VWYvOZTT1w7Y0df0mTNl8eDqujJubLRwJ6qNXp6HBGBLYj1 67XgL6WhuxqhZqH8aSp/M1aramY7EugEEt+T9Ex81ydzUNGKqgsafKMDJbVEbHtk 5kPgLQfPjfiq2elkeroRC9QF58X3kMqWy5PGzCRU5DNPSedJZS2wwK/rKofBom8= =dNZF -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --3BjoNV5KkjW1cxnK--