Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20221003223222.448551-1-prabhakar.mahadev-lad.rj@bp.renesas.com>
 <20221003223222.448551-3-prabhakar.mahadev-lad.rj@bp.renesas.com>
 <YzxwoELNBctbhjJb@spud> <CA+V-a8tgvF16vduoQ+ZbzTpRJUmCnN-GPQs5G8AqMOXbnznwHA@mail.gmail.com>
 <F0B6C609-6C39-4080-8F07-7FEFFAFEA993@kernel.org> <5254a42c-9233-6f9a-eff8-33324a184d20@microchip.com>
In-Reply-To: <5254a42c-9233-6f9a-eff8-33324a184d20@microchip.com>
From:   "Lad, Prabhakar" <prabhakar.csengg@gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 5 Oct 2022 11:20:40 +0100
Message-ID: <CA+V-a8tS=vsTW=SvGeAjy_M9C=ZwtaWHYhdBK=XV0M9T_c3b5A@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 2/2] soc: renesas: Add L2 cache management for
 RZ/Five SoC
To:     Conor.Dooley@microchip.com
Cc:     conor@kernel.org, geert+renesas@glider.be,
        paul.walmsley@sifive.com, palmer@dabbelt.com,
        aou@eecs.berkeley.edu, robh+dt@kernel.org,
        krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org, magnus.damm@gmail.com,
        heiko@sntech.de, guoren@kernel.org, philipp.tomsich@vrull.eu,
        nathan@kernel.org, atishp@rivosinc.com, apatel@ventanamicro.com,
        linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org,
        biju.das.jz@bp.renesas.com, prabhakar.mahadev-lad.rj@bp.renesas.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

Hi Conor,

On Wed, Oct 5, 2022 at 10:17 AM <Conor.Dooley@microchip.com> wrote:
>
> On 05/10/2022 09:58, Conor Dooley wrote:
> > EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe
> >
> > On 5 October 2022 09:44:56 IST, "Lad, Prabhakar" <prabhakar.csengg@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Hi Conor,
> >>
> >> Thank you for the review.
> >>
> >> On Tue, Oct 4, 2022 at 6:43 PM Conor Dooley <conor@kernel.org> wrote:
> >
> >>>> +static void cpu_dcache_wb_range(unsigned long start,
> >>>> +                             unsigned long end,
> >>>> +                             int line_size)
> >>>> +{
> >>>> +     bool ucctl_ok = false;
> >>>> +     unsigned long pa;
> >>>> +     int mhartid = 0;
> >>>> +#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
> >>>> +     mhartid = smp_processor_id();
> >>>> +#endif
> >>>
> >>> Won't this produce complaints from your if you compile with CONFIG_SMP
> >>> set?
> >>>
> >> No I dont see a build issue with SMP enabled, do you see any reason
> >> why it should fail?
> >
> > Not fail but complain about the unused variable.
> >
>
> Not unused variable, sorry but the unused 0 that it was initialised with*

No, it doesn't complain (I dont think compilers complain of such
unused assignments, maybe I'm wrong). BTW I am using GCC 9.4.0. Do you
think I need to update it?

Cheers,
Prabhakar