| Message ID | 1443699599-9693-1-git-send-email-sudipm.mukherjee@gmail.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted |
| Delegated to: | Eduardo Valentin |
| Headers | show |
2015-10-01 20:39 GMT+09:00 Sudip Mukherjee <sudipm.mukherjee@gmail.com>: > The value of emul_con was getting overwritten if the selected soc is > SOC_ARCH_EXYNOS5260. And so as a result we were reading from the wrong > register in the case of SOC_ARCH_EXYNOS5260. How the value is overwritten if the soc is Exynos5260? I can't see it (although the "else if" is still more obvious than "if" but how does the description match the code?). Best regards, Krzysztof > > Signed-off-by: Sudip Mukherjee <sudip@vectorindia.org> > --- > drivers/thermal/samsung/exynos_tmu.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/thermal/samsung/exynos_tmu.c b/drivers/thermal/samsung/exynos_tmu.c > index 0bae8cc..ca920b0 100644 > --- a/drivers/thermal/samsung/exynos_tmu.c > +++ b/drivers/thermal/samsung/exynos_tmu.c > @@ -932,7 +932,7 @@ static void exynos4412_tmu_set_emulation(struct exynos_tmu_data *data, > > if (data->soc == SOC_ARCH_EXYNOS5260) > emul_con = EXYNOS5260_EMUL_CON; > - if (data->soc == SOC_ARCH_EXYNOS5433) > + else if (data->soc == SOC_ARCH_EXYNOS5433) > emul_con = EXYNOS5433_TMU_EMUL_CON; > else if (data->soc == SOC_ARCH_EXYNOS7) > emul_con = EXYNOS7_TMU_REG_EMUL_CON; > -- > 1.9.1 > > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pm" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On Thu, Oct 01, 2015 at 10:18:57PM +0900, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > 2015-10-01 20:39 GMT+09:00 Sudip Mukherjee <sudipm.mukherjee@gmail.com>: > > The value of emul_con was getting overwritten if the selected soc is > > SOC_ARCH_EXYNOS5260. And so as a result we were reading from the wrong > > register in the case of SOC_ARCH_EXYNOS5260. > > How the value is overwritten if the soc is Exynos5260? I can't see it > (although the "else if" is still more obvious than "if" but how does > the description match the code?). The code here is: if (data->soc == SOC_ARCH_EXYNOS5260) emul_con = EXYNOS5260_EMUL_CON; if (data->soc == SOC_ARCH_EXYNOS5433) emul_con = EXYNOS5433_TMU_EMUL_CON; else if (data->soc == SOC_ARCH_EXYNOS7) emul_con = EXYNOS7_TMU_REG_EMUL_CON; else emul_con = EXYNOS_EMUL_CON; So if data->soc is SOC_ARCH_EXYNOS5260 , then emul_con becomes EXYNOS5260_EMUL_CON. But again for the else part it will become EXYNOS_EMUL_CON. regards sudip -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pm" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
2015-10-01 23:12 GMT+09:00 Sudip Mukherjee <sudipm.mukherjee@gmail.com>: > On Thu, Oct 01, 2015 at 10:18:57PM +0900, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >> 2015-10-01 20:39 GMT+09:00 Sudip Mukherjee <sudipm.mukherjee@gmail.com>: >> > The value of emul_con was getting overwritten if the selected soc is >> > SOC_ARCH_EXYNOS5260. And so as a result we were reading from the wrong >> > register in the case of SOC_ARCH_EXYNOS5260. >> >> How the value is overwritten if the soc is Exynos5260? I can't see it >> (although the "else if" is still more obvious than "if" but how does >> the description match the code?). > The code here is: > if (data->soc == SOC_ARCH_EXYNOS5260) > emul_con = EXYNOS5260_EMUL_CON; > if (data->soc == SOC_ARCH_EXYNOS5433) > emul_con = EXYNOS5433_TMU_EMUL_CON; > else if (data->soc == SOC_ARCH_EXYNOS7) > emul_con = EXYNOS7_TMU_REG_EMUL_CON; > else > emul_con = EXYNOS_EMUL_CON; > > So if data->soc is SOC_ARCH_EXYNOS5260 , then emul_con becomes > EXYNOS5260_EMUL_CON. But again for the else part it will become > EXYNOS_EMUL_CON. Indeed! Fixes: 488c7455d74c ("thermal: exynos: Add the support for Exynos5433 TMU") Reviewed-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@samsung.com> Best regards, Krzysztof -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pm" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On 2015? 10? 01? 20:39, Sudip Mukherjee wrote: > The value of emul_con was getting overwritten if the selected soc is > SOC_ARCH_EXYNOS5260. And so as a result we were reading from the wrong > register in the case of SOC_ARCH_EXYNOS5260. > > Signed-off-by: Sudip Mukherjee <sudip@vectorindia.org> > --- > drivers/thermal/samsung/exynos_tmu.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/thermal/samsung/exynos_tmu.c b/drivers/thermal/samsung/exynos_tmu.c > index 0bae8cc..ca920b0 100644 > --- a/drivers/thermal/samsung/exynos_tmu.c > +++ b/drivers/thermal/samsung/exynos_tmu.c > @@ -932,7 +932,7 @@ static void exynos4412_tmu_set_emulation(struct exynos_tmu_data *data, > > if (data->soc == SOC_ARCH_EXYNOS5260) > emul_con = EXYNOS5260_EMUL_CON; > - if (data->soc == SOC_ARCH_EXYNOS5433) > + else if (data->soc == SOC_ARCH_EXYNOS5433) > emul_con = EXYNOS5433_TMU_EMUL_CON; > else if (data->soc == SOC_ARCH_EXYNOS7) > emul_con = EXYNOS7_TMU_REG_EMUL_CON; > Thanks for your point out. Looks good to me. Reviewed-by: Chanwoo Choi <cw00.choi@samsung.com> Thanks, Chanwoo Choi -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pm" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On Fri, Oct 02, 2015 at 08:43:52AM +0900, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > 2015-10-01 23:12 GMT+09:00 Sudip Mukherjee <sudipm.mukherjee@gmail.com>: > > On Thu, Oct 01, 2015 at 10:18:57PM +0900, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > >> 2015-10-01 20:39 GMT+09:00 Sudip Mukherjee <sudipm.mukherjee@gmail.com>: > >> > The value of emul_con was getting overwritten if the selected soc is > >> > SOC_ARCH_EXYNOS5260. And so as a result we were reading from the wrong > >> > register in the case of SOC_ARCH_EXYNOS5260. > >> > >> How the value is overwritten if the soc is Exynos5260? I can't see it > >> (although the "else if" is still more obvious than "if" but how does > >> the description match the code?). > > The code here is: > > if (data->soc == SOC_ARCH_EXYNOS5260) > > emul_con = EXYNOS5260_EMUL_CON; > > if (data->soc == SOC_ARCH_EXYNOS5433) > > emul_con = EXYNOS5433_TMU_EMUL_CON; > > else if (data->soc == SOC_ARCH_EXYNOS7) > > emul_con = EXYNOS7_TMU_REG_EMUL_CON; > > else > > emul_con = EXYNOS_EMUL_CON; > > > > So if data->soc is SOC_ARCH_EXYNOS5260 , then emul_con becomes > > EXYNOS5260_EMUL_CON. But again for the else part it will become > > EXYNOS_EMUL_CON. > > Indeed! > > Fixes: 488c7455d74c ("thermal: exynos: Add the support for Exynos5433 TMU") > > Reviewed-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@samsung.com> Hi Krzysztof, Who will pick this one up? I still do not see it in linux-next. regards sudip -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pm" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
2015-10-08 23:21 GMT+09:00 Sudip Mukherjee <sudipm.mukherjee@gmail.com>: > On Fri, Oct 02, 2015 at 08:43:52AM +0900, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >> 2015-10-01 23:12 GMT+09:00 Sudip Mukherjee <sudipm.mukherjee@gmail.com>: >> > On Thu, Oct 01, 2015 at 10:18:57PM +0900, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >> >> 2015-10-01 20:39 GMT+09:00 Sudip Mukherjee <sudipm.mukherjee@gmail.com>: >> >> > The value of emul_con was getting overwritten if the selected soc is >> >> > SOC_ARCH_EXYNOS5260. And so as a result we were reading from the wrong >> >> > register in the case of SOC_ARCH_EXYNOS5260. >> >> >> >> How the value is overwritten if the soc is Exynos5260? I can't see it >> >> (although the "else if" is still more obvious than "if" but how does >> >> the description match the code?). >> > The code here is: >> > if (data->soc == SOC_ARCH_EXYNOS5260) >> > emul_con = EXYNOS5260_EMUL_CON; >> > if (data->soc == SOC_ARCH_EXYNOS5433) >> > emul_con = EXYNOS5433_TMU_EMUL_CON; >> > else if (data->soc == SOC_ARCH_EXYNOS7) >> > emul_con = EXYNOS7_TMU_REG_EMUL_CON; >> > else >> > emul_con = EXYNOS_EMUL_CON; >> > >> > So if data->soc is SOC_ARCH_EXYNOS5260 , then emul_con becomes >> > EXYNOS5260_EMUL_CON. But again for the else part it will become >> > EXYNOS_EMUL_CON. >> >> Indeed! >> >> Fixes: 488c7455d74c ("thermal: exynos: Add the support for Exynos5433 TMU") >> >> Reviewed-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@samsung.com> > > Hi Krzysztof, > Who will pick this one up? I still do not see it in linux-next. Hi! I guess it is a patch for Lukasz. Lukasz, Do you plan to pick it up or maybe this should go through samsung-soc tree? Best regards, Krzysztof -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pm" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Hi Krzysztof, > 2015-10-08 23:21 GMT+09:00 Sudip Mukherjee > <sudipm.mukherjee@gmail.com>: > > On Fri, Oct 02, 2015 at 08:43:52AM +0900, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > >> 2015-10-01 23:12 GMT+09:00 Sudip Mukherjee > >> <sudipm.mukherjee@gmail.com>: > >> > On Thu, Oct 01, 2015 at 10:18:57PM +0900, Krzysztof Kozlowski > >> > wrote: > >> >> 2015-10-01 20:39 GMT+09:00 Sudip Mukherjee > >> >> <sudipm.mukherjee@gmail.com>: > >> >> > The value of emul_con was getting overwritten if the selected > >> >> > soc is SOC_ARCH_EXYNOS5260. And so as a result we were > >> >> > reading from the wrong register in the case of > >> >> > SOC_ARCH_EXYNOS5260. > >> >> > >> >> How the value is overwritten if the soc is Exynos5260? I can't > >> >> see it (although the "else if" is still more obvious than "if" > >> >> but how does the description match the code?). > >> > The code here is: > >> > if (data->soc == SOC_ARCH_EXYNOS5260) > >> > emul_con = EXYNOS5260_EMUL_CON; > >> > if (data->soc == SOC_ARCH_EXYNOS5433) > >> > emul_con = EXYNOS5433_TMU_EMUL_CON; > >> > else if (data->soc == SOC_ARCH_EXYNOS7) > >> > emul_con = EXYNOS7_TMU_REG_EMUL_CON; > >> > else > >> > emul_con = EXYNOS_EMUL_CON; > >> > > >> > So if data->soc is SOC_ARCH_EXYNOS5260 , then emul_con becomes > >> > EXYNOS5260_EMUL_CON. But again for the else part it will become > >> > EXYNOS_EMUL_CON. > >> > >> Indeed! > >> > >> Fixes: 488c7455d74c ("thermal: exynos: Add the support for > >> Exynos5433 TMU") > >> > >> Reviewed-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@samsung.com> > > > > Hi Krzysztof, > > Who will pick this one up? I still do not see it in linux-next. > > Hi! > > I guess it is a patch for Lukasz. > > Lukasz, > Do you plan to pick it up or maybe this should go through samsung-soc > tree? This is the only one patch, which is waiting in my queue. Since no more fixes available, please feel free to grab this patch to samsung-soc. Acked-by: Lukasz Majewski <l.majewski@samsung.com> > > Best regards, > Krzysztof
W dniu 09.10.2015 o 21:07, Lukasz Majewski pisze: > Hi Krzysztof, > >> 2015-10-08 23:21 GMT+09:00 Sudip Mukherjee >> <sudipm.mukherjee@gmail.com>: >>> On Fri, Oct 02, 2015 at 08:43:52AM +0900, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >>>> 2015-10-01 23:12 GMT+09:00 Sudip Mukherjee >>>> <sudipm.mukherjee@gmail.com>: >>>>> On Thu, Oct 01, 2015 at 10:18:57PM +0900, Krzysztof Kozlowski >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> 2015-10-01 20:39 GMT+09:00 Sudip Mukherjee >>>>>> <sudipm.mukherjee@gmail.com>: >>>>>>> The value of emul_con was getting overwritten if the selected >>>>>>> soc is SOC_ARCH_EXYNOS5260. And so as a result we were >>>>>>> reading from the wrong register in the case of >>>>>>> SOC_ARCH_EXYNOS5260. >>>>>> >>>>>> How the value is overwritten if the soc is Exynos5260? I can't >>>>>> see it (although the "else if" is still more obvious than "if" >>>>>> but how does the description match the code?). >>>>> The code here is: >>>>> if (data->soc == SOC_ARCH_EXYNOS5260) >>>>> emul_con = EXYNOS5260_EMUL_CON; >>>>> if (data->soc == SOC_ARCH_EXYNOS5433) >>>>> emul_con = EXYNOS5433_TMU_EMUL_CON; >>>>> else if (data->soc == SOC_ARCH_EXYNOS7) >>>>> emul_con = EXYNOS7_TMU_REG_EMUL_CON; >>>>> else >>>>> emul_con = EXYNOS_EMUL_CON; >>>>> >>>>> So if data->soc is SOC_ARCH_EXYNOS5260 , then emul_con becomes >>>>> EXYNOS5260_EMUL_CON. But again for the else part it will become >>>>> EXYNOS_EMUL_CON. >>>> >>>> Indeed! >>>> >>>> Fixes: 488c7455d74c ("thermal: exynos: Add the support for >>>> Exynos5433 TMU") >>>> >>>> Reviewed-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@samsung.com> >>> >>> Hi Krzysztof, >>> Who will pick this one up? I still do not see it in linux-next. >> >> Hi! >> >> I guess it is a patch for Lukasz. >> >> Lukasz, >> Do you plan to pick it up or maybe this should go through samsung-soc >> tree? > > This is the only one patch, which is waiting in my queue. Since no more > fixes available, please feel free to grab this patch to samsung-soc. > > Acked-by: Lukasz Majewski <l.majewski@samsung.com> Okay, thanks! Applied to fixes for current cycle. I'll it send later to Kukjin (unless he picks it as well). Best regards, Krzysztof -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pm" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
diff --git a/drivers/thermal/samsung/exynos_tmu.c b/drivers/thermal/samsung/exynos_tmu.c index 0bae8cc..ca920b0 100644 --- a/drivers/thermal/samsung/exynos_tmu.c +++ b/drivers/thermal/samsung/exynos_tmu.c @@ -932,7 +932,7 @@ static void exynos4412_tmu_set_emulation(struct exynos_tmu_data *data, if (data->soc == SOC_ARCH_EXYNOS5260) emul_con = EXYNOS5260_EMUL_CON; - if (data->soc == SOC_ARCH_EXYNOS5433) + else if (data->soc == SOC_ARCH_EXYNOS5433) emul_con = EXYNOS5433_TMU_EMUL_CON; else if (data->soc == SOC_ARCH_EXYNOS7) emul_con = EXYNOS7_TMU_REG_EMUL_CON;
The value of emul_con was getting overwritten if the selected soc is SOC_ARCH_EXYNOS5260. And so as a result we were reading from the wrong register in the case of SOC_ARCH_EXYNOS5260. Signed-off-by: Sudip Mukherjee <sudip@vectorindia.org> --- drivers/thermal/samsung/exynos_tmu.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)