Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932702AbaLAXFD (ORCPT ); Mon, 1 Dec 2014 18:05:03 -0500 Received: from mail-ob0-f179.google.com ([209.85.214.179]:58817 "EHLO mail-ob0-f179.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932582AbaLAXFA (ORCPT ); Mon, 1 Dec 2014 18:05:00 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20141201225057.GA11285@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> References: <1417461694-5129-1-git-send-email-dianders@chromium.org> <20141201225057.GA11285@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2014 15:04:59 -0800 X-Google-Sender-Auth: pq2_z3Plzafnib0N9jqPV6tnRKk Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: rockchip: Convert resume code to C From: Doug Anderson To: Russell King - ARM Linux Cc: Heiko Stuebner , Chris Zhong , Kevin Hilman , Sonny Rao , Tomasz Figa , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , "open list:ARM/Rockchip SoC..." , russ.dill@gmail.com, Olof Johansson , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.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 Russel, On Mon, Dec 1, 2014 at 2:50 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > What I see here is a load of complexity which achieves very little. > The result doesn't get rid of much assembly, but it does make stuff > more complicated. And the diffstat speaks volumes about this: > > 10 files changed, 275 insertions(+), 94 deletions(-) > > There's a lot of words in the description, but it's missing the most > important bit: why do we want to take this approach - what benefits > does it bring? Sure. I guess the most important words in the description are: > We convert the existing assembly resume code into C as proof that this > works and to prepare for linking in SDRAM reinit code. I can't say that the SDRAM reinit code is ready for prime time yet, but you can get a preview of what it could look like at: https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/#/c/227366/25/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/embedded/rk3288_ddr_resume.c Adding that code in assembly seems like a very, very bad idea. Certainly my patch could wait until the DDR code is ready to be posted upstream if that made sense. One advantage of waiting is that it's possible that the DDR code might end up moving elsewhere if it made sense to have it part of a memory controller driver or something like that. -Doug -- 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/