hpet related
PATCH 1/1 hpet related
Hi Andrew:
Some hpet clean up and a fix to the RTC request_irq issue.
thanks,
Bob
arch/i386/kernel/time_hpet.c +0 -0
@@ -155,9 +155,9 @@
hd.hd_address = hpet_virt_address; hd.hd_nirqs = ntimer; hd.hd_flags = HPET_DATA_PLATFORM;
- HD_STATE(&hd, 0);
+ hpet_timer_reserved(&hd, 0);
#ifdef CONFIG_HPET_EMULATE_RTC
- HD_STATE(&hd, 1);
+ hpet_timer_reserved(&hd, 1);
#endif hd.hd_irq[0] = HPET_LEGACY_8254; hd.hd_irq[1] = HPET_LEGACY_RTC;
drivers/char/Kconfig +0 -0
@@ -955,8 +955,8 @@
default n
depends on ACPI
help
- If you say Y here, you will have a device named "/dev/hpet/XX" for - each timer supported by the HPET. The timers are + If you say Y here, you will have a miscdevice named "/dev/hpet/". Each + open selects one of the timers supported by the HPET. The timers are
non-periodioc and/or periodic.
config HPET_RTC_IRQ
drivers/char/rtc.c +0 -0
@@ -99,7 +99,6 @@
#ifdef CONFIG_HPET_RTC_IRQ
#undef RTC_IRQ
-#define RTC_IRQ 0
#endif
#ifdef RTC_IRQ
include/linux/hpet.h +0 -0
@@ -54,12 +54,6 @@
#define HPET_LEG_RT_CNF_MASK (2UL)
#define HPET_ENABLE_CNF_MASK (1UL)
-/*
- * HPET interrupt status register
- */
-
-#define HPET_ISR_CLEAR(HPET, TIMER) \
- (HPET)->hpet_isr |= (1UL << TIMER)
/*
* Timer configuration register
@@ -115,8 +109,6 @@
void *ht_opaque; };
-#define HD_STATE(HD, TIMER) (HD)->hd_state |= (1 << TIMER)
-
struct hpet_data {
unsigned long hd_address;
unsigned short hd_nirqs;@@ -127,6 +119,12 @@
#define HPET_DATA_PLATFORM 0x0001 /* platform call to hpet_alloc */
+static inline void hpet_timer_reserved(struct hpet_data *hd, int timer) +{
+ hd->hd_state |= (1 << timer);
+ return;
+}
+
int hpet_alloc(struct hpet_data *);
int hpet_register(struct hpet_task *, int);
int hpet_unregister(struct hpet_task *);
Quoted 6 lines · Robert Picco
+static inline void
hpet_timer_reserved(struct hpet_data *hd, int timer)
+{
+hd->hd_state|= (1 << timer);
+ return;
+}
The identifier "hpet_timer_reserved" implies (to me) that the function queries something. Except it doesn't.
Would "hpet_reserve_timer" be a better choice?
Sure. I'll make the change and resend patch.
Quoted 23 lines · Andrew Morton
Review
Quoted 7 lines · Robert Picco
(quoted diff) +5
-0+static inline void hpet_timer_reserved(struct hpet_data *hd, int timer) +{ + hd->hd_state |= (1 << timer); + return; +}The identifier "
hpet_timer_reserved" implies (to me) that the function queries something. Except it doesn't.Would "
hpet_reserve_timer" be a better choice?
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/