Re: [PATCH 9/9] clocksource: new RISC-V SBI timer driver

[Atish Patra]

On 7/27/18 7:38 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 11:51:56AM -0700, Atish Patra wrote:
> > Should we follow the same prefix for these functions?
> > either timer_riscv* or riscv_timer* ?
> >
> > Apologies for overlooking this in my timer patch as wel
>
> riscv_timer_* sounds saner to me, I can update that.

Thanks.
> > > +	struct clock_event_device *evdev = this_cpu_ptr(&riscv_clock_event);
> > > +
> >
> > The comment about the purpose of clearing the interrupt in the original
> > patch is removed here. If that's intentional, it's fine.
> >
> > I thought having that comment helps understanding the distinction between
> > clearing the timer interrupt in SBI call & here.
>
> Yes, that was intentional.  But given that I don't even understand why
> not using an ABI for architectural interrupt source enable/disable maybe
> I'm confused and should revisit that decision.

I tried adding a new SBI call to disable the interrupts. However, I 
realized that it is not recommended to change the SBI unless absolutely 
required.

Here is the PR & following discussion.
https://github.com/riscv/riscv-pk/pull/108

Regards,
Atish