[PATCH] OMAP: use fncpy to copy the PM code functions to SRAM
Tony Lindgren
tony at atomide.com
Wed Jan 19 14:10:57 EST 2011
* Jean Pihet <jean.pihet at newoldbits.com> [110119 00:05]:
> On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 12:44 AM, Tony Lindgren <tony at atomide.com> wrote:
> > * Russell King - ARM Linux <linux at arm.linux.org.uk> [110118 15:41]:
> >> On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 01:05:49PM +0100, Jean Pihet wrote:
> >> > Dave, Russell,
> >> >
> >> > On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 4:46 PM, Dave Martin <dave.martin at linaro.org> wrote:
> >> > > One way to work around this is would be to make omap_sram_push() a macro:
> >> > >
> >> > > #define omap_sram_push(funcp, size) \
> >> > > (typeof(funcp))_do_omap_sram_push((void *)(funcp), size)
> >> > >
> >> > > ... where the definition of _do_omap_sram_push() is the same is the
> >> > > existing definition of omap_sram_push(). Providing
> >> > > _do_omap_sram_push() is not called directly, this should now be
> >> > > type-safe.
> >> > >
> >> > Ok I reworked the patch from your suggestions. Indeed a few functions
> >> > types mismatch have been spotted and corrected using the fncpy API.
> >> >
> >> > New patch sent as '[PATCH v2] OMAP: use fncpy to copy the PM code
> >> > functions to SRAM'.
> >>
> >> Looks good, thanks. Next problem to sort out is who's taking the
> >> patches...
> >
> > You can take them but we should have at least Kevin test and ack them.
> Sure, this needs some testing on OMAP1 & 2 platforms. It has only been
> compile tested on those (means: compile OK, functions types mismatches
> fixed).
>
> Anyone with OMAP1 & 2 boards willing to test?
Can you please repost the whole set one more time or have them in
some git branch? That way I can pull them into linux-omap master
branch for testing to make sure omap1 and 2 boards don't break.
Tony
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list