linux-mips
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH] MIPS: add proper set_mode() to cevt-r4k

To: linux-mips@linux-mips.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] MIPS: add proper set_mode() to cevt-r4k
From: John Crispin <john@phrozen.org>
Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2013 12:52:13 +0200
In-reply-to: <CAGVrzcYXyWB1bwoKyEFrSO7YEJx9Q_v2vOnnPnqVrFVKiigFrA@mail.gmail.com>
List-archive: <http://www.linux-mips.org/archives/linux-mips/>
List-help: <mailto:ecartis@linux-mips.org?Subject=help>
List-id: linux-mips <linux-mips.eddie.linux-mips.org>
List-owner: <mailto:ralf@linux-mips.org>
List-post: <mailto:linux-mips@linux-mips.org>
List-software: Ecartis version 1.0.0
List-subscribe: <mailto:ecartis@linux-mips.org?subject=subscribe%20linux-mips>
List-unsubscribe: <mailto:ecartis@linux-mips.org?subject=unsubscribe%20linux-mips>
Original-recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org
References: <1375091743-20608-1-git-send-email-blogic@openwrt.org> <CAGVrzcYXyWB1bwoKyEFrSO7YEJx9Q_v2vOnnPnqVrFVKiigFrA@mail.gmail.com>
Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:10.0.12) Gecko/20130116 Icedove/10.0.12
Hi Florian,

It is not clear to me whether this secondary cevt is also a r4k-cevt
device, or if it is something else? If the IRQ is shared, is there any
way to differentiate the ralink cevt from the r4k cevt, such that both
could request the same irq with the IRQF_SHARED flag?


IRQF_SHARED | IRQF_TIMER is not allowed as a combination.


It looks to me like you are moving the irq setup later just to ensure
that your ralink clockevent device has been registered before and has
set cp0_timer_irq_installed when the set_mode() r4k clockevent device
runs, such that it won't register the same IRQ that your platforms
uses. If that it the case, cannot you just ensure that you run your
cevt device registration before mips_clockevent_init() is called?

i dont like relying on the order in which the modules get loaded.

the actual problem is not the irq sharing but that the cevt-r4k registers the irq when the cevt is registered and not when it is activated. i believe that the patch fixes this problem

        John

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>