Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
User-Agent: Cyrus-JMAP/3.5.0-alpha0-1125-g685cec594c-fm-20210825.001-g685cec59
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <a758fd4b-82d6-4980-8ca5-efd396d4f246@www.fastmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <f71cbfb9-b72c-39d2-6acb-dc83b6a496f8@roeck-us.net>
References: <20210724224424.2085404-1-linus.walleij@linaro.org>
 <20210724224424.2085404-2-linus.walleij@linaro.org>
 <20210821042010.GA1759866@roeck-us.net>
 <CACRpkdYObGTWni3sSa21iNsgikzj7t9MA6y4TNgkBTTYQt+coA@mail.gmail.com>
 <4d87c7af-d2e3-9456-130a-b35b507ff3a2@roeck-us.net>
 <567a65a8-077b-7394-c8e2-dbd9f063e02c@kaod.org>
 <4c87cee3-2dfb-41e7-a18b-5ed4687a6f7a@www.fastmail.com>
 <f71cbfb9-b72c-39d2-6acb-dc83b6a496f8@roeck-us.net>
Date:   Mon, 30 Aug 2021 16:00:10 +0930
From:   "Andrew Jeffery" <andrew@aj.id.au>
To:     "Guenter Roeck" <linux@roeck-us.net>,
        =?UTF-8?Q?C=C3=A9dric_Le_Goater?= <clg@kaod.org>,
        "Linus Walleij" <linus.walleij@linaro.org>
Cc:     "Daniel Lezcano" <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>,
        "Thomas Gleixner" <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "Joel Stanley" <joel@jms.id.au>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2]: Be stric clocksource/drivers/fttmr010ter on IRQs
Content-Type: text/plain
Precedence: bulk


On Mon, 30 Aug 2021, at 14:28, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On 8/29/21 9:16 PM, Andrew Jeffery wrote:
> [ ... ]
> >>
> >>> I don't have the manuals, so I can't say what the correct behavior is,
> >>> but at least there is some evidence that TIMER_INTR_STATE may not exist
> >>> on ast2400 and ast2500 SOCs.
> >>
> >> On Aspeed SoCs AST2400 and AST2500, the TMC[34] register is a
> >> "control register #2" whereas on the AST2600 it is an "interruptarch/arm/boot/dts/ast2600-facebook-netbmc-common.dtsi:#include
> >> status register" with bits [0-7] holding the timers status.
> >>
> >> I would say that the patch simply should handle the "is_aspeed" case.
> > 
> > Well, is_aspeed is set true in the driver for all of the 2400, 2500 and
> > 2600. 0x34 behaves the way this patch expects on the 2600. So I think
> > we need something less coarse than is_aspeed?
> > 
> 
> If I understand the code correctly, ast2400 and ast2500 execute
> fttmr010_timer_interrupt(), while ast2600 has its own interrupt handler.
> To make this work, it would probably be necessary to check for is_aspeed
> in fttmr010_timer_interrupt(), and only execute the new code if the flag
> is false. The existing flag in struct fttmr010 should be good enough
> for that.

Sounds good.

Andrew