[PATCH v4 05/13] pm: at91: move the copying the sram function to the sram initializationi phase
Russell King - ARM Linux
linux at arm.linux.org.uk
Thu Jan 29 03:28:00 PST 2015
On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 09:43:16AM +0800, Wenyou Yang wrote:
> -#ifdef CONFIG_AT91_SLOW_CLOCK
> - /* copy slow_clock handler to SRAM, and call it */
> - memcpy(slow_clock, at91_slow_clock, at91_slow_clock_sz);
> -#endif
> slow_clock(at91_pmc_base, at91_ramc_base[0],
> at91_ramc_base[1],
> at91_pm_data.memctrl);
> @@ -272,6 +268,9 @@ static void __init at91_pm_sram_init(void)
> sram_pbase = gen_pool_virt_to_phys(sram_pool, sram_base);
> slow_clock = __arm_ioremap_exec(sram_pbase, at91_slow_clock_sz, false);
>
> + /* Copy the slow_clock handler to SRAM */
> + memcpy(slow_clock, at91_slow_clock, at91_slow_clock_sz);
> +
Why is this code not using the fncpy() support for copying functions.
Why is it not checking the return code from __arm_ioremap_exec() or
gen_pool_virt_to_phys() for failure?
This looks like quite a massive review failure when this code was
originally merged. It needs fixing.
--
FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line: currently at 10.5Mbps down 400kbps up
according to speedtest.net.
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list