On 11/02/2015 04:33 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
On Monday 02 November 2015 13:56:31 Daniel Lezcano wrote:static inline void rk_timer_disable(struct clock_event_device *ce) { writel_relaxed(TIMER_DISABLE, rk_base(ce) + TIMER_CONTROL_REG); - dsb(); + dsb(sy); }static inline void rk_timer_enable(struct clock_event_device *ce, u32 flags) { writel_relaxed(TIMER_ENABLE | TIMER_INT_UNMASK | flags, rk_base(ce) + TIMER_CONTROL_REG); - dsb(); + dsb(sy); }This will fail the compile test, because dsb() is not available on non-ARM architectures. Would it be enough to just use the normal writel() accessor here?
That's a good question and I believe we can remove it but I have to setup a rockchip board before doing the changes in order to test.
I the meantime added the COMPILE_TEST option but restricted it to ARM and ARM64.
-- <http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs Follow Linaro: <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro> Facebook | <http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg> Twitter | <http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog/> Blog -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
