From patchwork Thu May 17 15:47:01 2018 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Patchwork-Submitter: Sudeep Holla X-Patchwork-Id: 10407045 Return-Path: Received: from mail.wl.linuxfoundation.org (pdx-wl-mail.web.codeaurora.org [172.30.200.125]) by pdx-korg-patchwork.web.codeaurora.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B214960353 for ; Thu, 17 May 2018 15:47:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail.wl.linuxfoundation.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.wl.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A24B28305 for ; Thu, 17 May 2018 15:47:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail.wl.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix, from userid 486) id 8DCE728526; Thu, 17 May 2018 15:47:38 +0000 (UTC) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on pdx-wl-mail.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.9 required=2.0 tests=BAYES_00, MAILING_LIST_MULTI, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI autolearn=unavailable version=3.3.1 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.wl.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0587028305 for ; Thu, 17 May 2018 15:47:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752415AbeEQPrS (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 May 2018 11:47:18 -0400 Received: from usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com ([217.140.101.70]:37582 "EHLO foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752373AbeEQPrP (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 May 2018 11:47:15 -0400 Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.72.51.249]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1DB3F1435; Thu, 17 May 2018 08:47:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from e107155-lin (unknown [10.1.210.28]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 07EDE3F25D; Thu, 17 May 2018 08:47:10 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 16:47:01 +0100 From: Sudeep Holla To: Andy Shevchenko , Jeremy Linton Cc: Sudeep Holla , ACPI Devel Maling List , linux-arm Mailing List , Lorenzo Pieralisi , Hanjun Guo , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Will Deacon , Catalin Marinas , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Mark Rutland , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, Xiongfeng Wang , vkilari@codeaurora.org, Al Stone , Dietmar.Eggemann@arm.com, Morten.Rasmussen@arm.com, Palmer Dabbelt , Len Brown , John Garry , austinwc@codeaurora.org, tnowicki@caviumnetworks.com, jhugo@codeaurora.org, Ard Biesheuvel Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 02/12] drivers: base: cacheinfo: setup DT cache properties early Message-ID: <20180517154701.GA20281@e107155-lin> References: <20180511235807.30834-1-jeremy.linton@arm.com> <20180511235807.30834-3-jeremy.linton@arm.com> <78b08b68-ff57-8dd8-6eb1-00548f275eac@arm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV using ClamSMTP On 16/05/18 11:56, Sudeep Holla wrote: > Hi Andy, > > On 15/05/18 20:32, Andy Shevchenko wrote: >> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 8:15 PM, Jeremy Linton wrote: >>> On 05/11/2018 06:57 PM, Jeremy Linton wrote: >> >>>> - cache_size = of_get_property(this_leaf->of_node, propname, NULL); >>>> + cache_size = of_get_property(np, propname, NULL); >>>> if (cache_size) >>>> this_leaf->size = of_read_number(cache_size, 1); >> >> Can't you switch to of_read_property_uXX() variant here? >> > > This patch is just changing the first argument to the calls. So if we > need to change, it has to be separate patch. > > Now, we can use of_property_read_u64() but is there any particular > reason you mention that ? One reason I can see is that we can avoid > making explicit of_get_property call. Just wanted to the motive before I > can write the patch. > Is below patch does what you were looking for ? Regards, Sudeep --- From 71f1c10ddb5915a92fa74d38a4e2406d0ab27845 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Sudeep Holla Date: Wed, 16 May 2018 13:45:53 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] drivers: base: cacheinfo: use OF property_read_u64 instead of get_property,read_number of_property_read_u64 searches for a property in a device node and read a 64-bit value from it. Instead of using of_get_property to get the property and then read 64-bit value using of_read_number, we can make use of of_property_read_u64. Signed-off-by: Sudeep Holla --- drivers/base/cacheinfo.c | 24 +++++++++++------------- 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/base/cacheinfo.c b/drivers/base/cacheinfo.c index 2880e2ab01f5..56715014f07b 100644 --- a/drivers/base/cacheinfo.c +++ b/drivers/base/cacheinfo.c @@ -74,22 +74,21 @@ static inline int get_cacheinfo_idx(enum cache_type type) static void cache_size(struct cacheinfo *this_leaf, struct device_node *np) { const char *propname; - const __be32 *cache_size; + u64 cache_size; int ct_idx; ct_idx = get_cacheinfo_idx(this_leaf->type); propname = cache_type_info[ct_idx].size_prop; - cache_size = of_get_property(np, propname, NULL); - if (cache_size) - this_leaf->size = of_read_number(cache_size, 1); + if (!of_property_read_u64(np, propname, &cache_size)) + this_leaf->size = cache_size; } /* not cache_line_size() because that's a macro in include/linux/cache.h */ static void cache_get_line_size(struct cacheinfo *this_leaf, struct device_node *np) { - const __be32 *line_size; + u64 line_size; int i, lim, ct_idx; ct_idx = get_cacheinfo_idx(this_leaf->type); @@ -99,27 +98,26 @@ static void cache_get_line_size(struct cacheinfo *this_leaf, const char *propname; propname = cache_type_info[ct_idx].line_size_props[i]; - line_size = of_get_property(np, propname, NULL); - if (line_size) + line_size = of_property_read_u64(np, propname, &line_size); + if (line_size) { + this_leaf->coherency_line_size = line_size; break; + } } - if (line_size) - this_leaf->coherency_line_size = of_read_number(line_size, 1); } static void cache_nr_sets(struct cacheinfo *this_leaf, struct device_node *np) { const char *propname; - const __be32 *nr_sets; + u64 nr_sets; int ct_idx; ct_idx = get_cacheinfo_idx(this_leaf->type); propname = cache_type_info[ct_idx].nr_sets_prop; - nr_sets = of_get_property(np, propname, NULL); - if (nr_sets) - this_leaf->number_of_sets = of_read_number(nr_sets, 1); + if (!of_property_read_u64(np, propname, &nr_sets)) + this_leaf->number_of_sets = nr_sets; } static void cache_associativity(struct cacheinfo *this_leaf)