Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753964AbaA0Rau (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 Jan 2014 12:30:50 -0500 Received: from mail-wg0-f41.google.com ([74.125.82.41]:37574 "EHLO mail-wg0-f41.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753863AbaA0Raq (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 Jan 2014 12:30:46 -0500 Message-ID: <52E697C6.10809@linaro.org> Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2014 18:30:46 +0100 From: Daniel Lezcano User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Russell King - ARM Linux CC: Nicolas Pitre , Catalin Marinas , Benjamin Herrenschmidt , Paul Mundt , Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , Peter Zijlstra , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-sh@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/9] ARM: get rid of arch_cpu_idle_prepare() References: <1390802904-28399-1-git-send-email-nicolas.pitre@linaro.org> <1390802904-28399-2-git-send-email-nicolas.pitre@linaro.org> <52E6175F.1050401@linaro.org> <20140127160736.GP15937@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <52E69395.9020004@linaro.org> <20140127172110.GR15937@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> In-Reply-To: <20140127172110.GR15937@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 01/27/2014 06:21 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > On Mon, Jan 27, 2014 at 06:12:53PM +0100, Daniel Lezcano wrote: >> On 01/27/2014 05:07 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: >>> On Mon, Jan 27, 2014 at 09:22:55AM +0100, Daniel Lezcano wrote: >>>> On 01/27/2014 07:08 AM, Nicolas Pitre wrote: >>>>> ARM and ARM64 are the only two architectures implementing >>>>> arch_cpu_idle_prepare() simply to call local_fiq_enable(). >>>>> >>>>> We have secondary_start_kernel() already calling local_fiq_enable() and >>>>> this is done a second time in arch_cpu_idle_prepare() in that case. And >>>>> enabling FIQs has nothing to do with idling the CPU to start with. >>>>> >>>>> So let's introduce init_fiq_boot_cpu() to take care of FIQs on the boot >>>>> CPU and remove arch_cpu_idle_prepare(). This is now done a bit earlier >>>>> at late_initcall time but this shouldn't make a difference in practice >>>>> i.e. when FIQs are actually used. >>>>> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Nicolas Pitre >>>> >>>> Reviewed-by: Daniel Lezcano >>> >>> What kind of review did you do when giving that attributation? >> >> I did the review to the best of my knowledge and with good will. >> >> I read your comment on this patch and I learnt one more thing. >> >> Today, I am smarter than yesterday and dumber than tomorrow :) > > Just be aware that putting a comment along with the reviewed-by tag > is always a good idea. I know that's a little more work, but this has > been raised a number of times by various people over the years. > > A reviewed-by tag on its own doesn't mean much, as it could mean that > you've just glanced over the code and decided "yea, it looks okay", or > it could mean that you've spent all day verifying that the code change > is indeed correct. > > Consequently, some will ignore emails which just contain a reviewed-by > attributation. Thanks for the clarification. I will take care of giving a comment next time. -- Daniel -- Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/