On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 12:08:35PM -0800, Stephen Boyd wrote:
Here are the split patches.
The first two patches cleanup and fix the hvc_dcc driver for my
compiler. The final patch is more controversial, it removes the
v6 and v7 differences in this driver.
Stephen Boyd (3):
hvc_dcc: Fix
On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 12:08:35PM -0800, Stephen Boyd wrote:
Here are the split patches.
The first two patches cleanup and fix the hvc_dcc driver for my
compiler. The final patch is more controversial, it removes the
v6 and v7 differences in this driver.
Stephen Boyd (3):
hvc_dcc: Fix
On Thu, Feb 03, 2011 at 03:19:07PM -0800, Stephen Boyd wrote:
On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 12:08:35PM -0800, Stephen Boyd wrote:
Here are the split patches.
The first two patches cleanup and fix the hvc_dcc driver for my
compiler. The final patch is more controversial, it removes the
v6 and
Redone against tty-next and collected acks from Nicolas and Tony.
Stephen Boyd (3):
hvc_dcc: Fix bad code generation by marking assembly volatile
hvc_dcc: Simplify put_chars()/get_chars() loops
hvc_dcc: Simplify assembly for v6 and v7 ARM
drivers/tty/hvc/hvc_dcc.c | 43
The inline assembly differences for v6 vs. v7 in the hvc_dcc
driver are purely optimizations. On a v7 processor, an mrc with
the pc sets the condition codes to the 28-31 bits of the register
being read. It just so happens that the TX/RX full bits the DCC
driver is testing for are high enough in
Casting and anding with 0xff is unnecessary in
hvc_dcc_put_chars() since buf is already a char[].
__dcc_get_char() can't return an int less than 0 since it only
returns a char. Simplify the if statement in hvc_dcc_get_chars()
to take this into account.
Cc: Daniel Walker dwal...@codeaurora.org
