Re: [PATCH v6 01/11] ARM: sunxi: smp: Move assembly code into a file

[MylÃne Josserand]

Hello Chen-Yu,

On Wed, 18 Apr 2018 18:05:03 +0800
Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 4:45 PM, Maxime Ripard
> <maxime.ripard@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 07:25:15PM +0800, Chen-Yu Tsai wrote:  
> >> On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 7:17 PM, Maxime Ripard
> >> <maxime.ripard@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:  
> >> > On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 11:12:41AM +0800, Chen-Yu Tsai wrote:  
> >> >> On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 5:50 AM, MylÃne Josserand
> >> >> <mylene.josserand@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:  
> >> >> > Move the assembly code for cluster cache enabling and resuming
> >> >> > into an assembly file instead of having it directly in C code.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Remove the CFLAGS because we are using the ARM directive "arch"
> >> >> > instead.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Signed-off-by: MylÃne Josserand <mylene.josserand@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> >> >> > ---
> >> >> >  arch/arm/mach-sunxi/Makefile  |  4 +--
> >> >> >  arch/arm/mach-sunxi/headsmp.S | 80 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >> >> >  arch/arm/mach-sunxi/mc_smp.c  | 82 +++----------------------------------------
> >> >> >  3 files changed, 85 insertions(+), 81 deletions(-)
> >> >> >  create mode 100644 arch/arm/mach-sunxi/headsmp.S  
> >> >>
> >> >> I'm still not convinced about this whole "move ASM to separate
> >> >> file" thing, especially now that you aren't actually adding any
> >> >> sunxi-specific ASM code beyond a simple function call.
> >> >>
> >> >> Could you drop this for now?  
> >> >
> >> > I'd really like to have this merged actually. There's a significant
> >> > readibility improvement, so even if there's no particular functional
> >> > improvement, I'd still call it a win.  
> >>
> >> What parts do you consider hard to read? The extra quotes? Trailing
> >> newline? Or perhaps the __stringify bits?  
> >
> > All of this, plus the clobbers and operands.  
> 
> Ok. Lets move it then.

Ok, I will not drop this patch then.

> 
> The kbuild reports indicate this still needs some work though.

Yes, this is "normal" because the patch, that I depend on, is not
applied yet (even if my cover-letter can let think that, it is not the
case, sorry).

It is applied on Broadcom ARM SoC since Tuesday: 
https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/2/23/1263
https://github.com/Broadcom/stblinux/commits/soc/next

With this patch, it should fix the errors reported by kbuild.

Best regards,

-- 
MylÃne Josserand, Bootlin (formerly Free Electrons)
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
http://bootlin.com