Re: [PATCH RESEND 3/3] irqchip: orion: reverse irq handling priority

From: Jason Cooper
Date: Mon Apr 28 2014 - 16:59:35 EST


On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 10:06:25PM +0200, Sebastian Hesselbarth wrote:
> On 04/28/2014 09:39 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > On Sat, 26 Apr 2014, Sebastian Hesselbarth wrote:
> >
> >> Non-DT irq handlers were working through irq causes from most-significant
> >> to least-significant bit, while DT irqchip driver does it the other way
> >> round. This revealed some more HW issues on Kirkwood peripheral IP, where
> >> spurious sdio irqs can happen although IP's irq enable registers are all
> >> zero. Although, not directly related with the described issue, reverse
> >> irq bit handling back to original order by replacing ffs() with fls().
> >
> > So why are we reverting to the original order?
> >
> > The explanation above is just confusing.
>
> Actually, I first wanted to reply "The original order worked for
> years, so get back to it." But then I thought about finding a better
> answer and remembered some comment of Russell a while ago.
>


> I disassembled the generated binary and the original order saves two
> instructions for each bit count using clz.
>
> With this patch:
> 60: e3a07001 mov r7, #1
> 64: e16f3f14 clz r3, r4
> 68: e263301f rsb r3, r3, #31
> 6c: e1c44317 bic r4, r4, r7, lsl r3
> 70: e5951004 ldr r1, [r5, #4]
>
> Without this patch:
> 60: e3a06001 mov r6, #1
> 64: e2643000 rsb r3, r4, #0
> 68: e0033004 and r3, r3, r4
> 6c: e16f3f13 clz r3, r3
> 70: e263301f rsb r3, r3, #31
> 74: e1c44316 bic r4, r4, r6, lsl r3
> 78: e5971004 ldr r1, [r7, #4]


> You want me to reword the commit message accordingly?

Please do. I would even quote the above.

thx,

Jason.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/