Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933153AbaFKQAo (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 Jun 2014 12:00:44 -0400 Received: from mail-oa0-f47.google.com ([209.85.219.47]:49638 "EHLO mail-oa0-f47.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932520AbaFKQAl (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 Jun 2014 12:00:41 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1402500612-4778-2-git-send-email-t.figa@samsung.com> References: <1402500612-4778-1-git-send-email-t.figa@samsung.com> <1402500612-4778-2-git-send-email-t.figa@samsung.com> Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2014 11:00:40 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] ARM: mm: cache-l2x0: Add base address argument to write_sec callback From: Jon Loeliger To: Tomasz Figa Cc: linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org, Kukjin Kim , Laura Abbott , Tony Lindgren , Linus Walleij , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Tomasz Figa , Santosh Shilimkar , Robin Holt , Russell King , linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > diff --git a/arch/arm/include/asm/mach/arch.h b/arch/arm/include/asm/mach/arch.h > index 060a75e..ddaebcd 100644 > --- a/arch/arm/include/asm/mach/arch.h > +++ b/arch/arm/include/asm/mach/arch.h > @@ -46,7 +46,8 @@ struct machine_desc { > enum reboot_mode reboot_mode; /* default restart mode */ > unsigned l2c_aux_val; /* L2 cache aux value */ > unsigned l2c_aux_mask; /* L2 cache aux mask */ > - void (*l2c_write_sec)(unsigned long, unsigned); > + void (*l2c_write_sec)(void __iomem *, > + unsigned long, unsigned); > struct smp_operations *smp; /* SMP operations */ > bool (*smp_init)(void); > void (*fixup)(struct tag *, char **); > diff --git a/arch/arm/mm/cache-l2x0.c b/arch/arm/mm/cache-l2x0.c > index efc5cab..1695eab 100644 > --- a/arch/arm/mm/cache-l2x0.c > +++ b/arch/arm/mm/cache-l2x0.c > @@ -72,7 +72,7 @@ static void l2c_write_sec(unsigned long val, void __iomem *base, unsigned reg) > if (val == readl_relaxed(base + reg)) > return; > if (outer_cache.write_sec) > - outer_cache.write_sec(val, reg); > + outer_cache.write_sec(base, val, reg); > else > writel_relaxed(val, base + reg); > } The parameter order (base, val, reg) seems very non-intuitive. Are you matching some existing prototype or adhering to some backwards compatibility issue? If not wouldn't, say, (base, reg, val) or (val, base, reg) be more intuitive? Thanks, jdl -- 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/