[PATCH v14 7/9] clocksource/drivers/arm_arch_timer: Refactor the timer init code to prepare for GTDT

[Mark Rutland]

On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 11:24:32PM +0800, Fu Wei wrote:
> On 21 October 2016 at 19:32, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland at arm.com> wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 02:17:15AM +0800, fu.wei at linaro.org wrote:
> >> +static int __init arch_timer_mem_register(struct device_node *np, void *frame)
> >>  {
> >> -     int ret;
> >> -     irq_handler_t func;
> >> +     struct device_node *frame_node = NULL;
> >>       struct arch_timer *t;
> >> +     void __iomem *base;
> >> +     irq_handler_t func;
> >> +     unsigned int irq;
> >> +     int ret;
> >> +
> >> +     if (!frame)
> >> +             return -EINVAL;
> >
> > Why would we call this without a frame?
> 
> Sorry, I just verify it , make sure frame is not NULL,
> Because it is a "static" function, so we do need this check?

I'd rather we simply don't call the function rather than passing a NULL
frame in.

> >> +
> >> +     if (np) {
> >
> > ... or without a node?
> 
> For "np", for now, we just  just verify it, but it is just paperation
> for GTDT support,
> Because in next patch, if np == NULL, that means we call this function
> from GTDT, but not DT.

Please don't do that. More on that below.

> > Please as Marc requested several versions ago: split the FW parsing
> > (ACPI and DT) so that happens first, *then* once we have the data in a
> > common format, use that to drive poking the HW, requesting IRQs, etc,
> > completely independent of the source.
> >
> > In patches, do this by:
> >
> > (1) adding the data structures
> > (2) splitting the existing DT probing to use them
> > (3) Adding ACPI functionality atop
> 
> this patch is a preparation for GTDT support, I have splitted some
> functions for reusing them in next patch(GTDT support)
> 
> if np == NULL, that means we call this function from GTDT, but
> if np != NULL, that means we call this function from DT

As above, please structure the patches such that that never happens.

We currently have:

+--------------------------+
| DT Parsing + Common code |
+--------------------------+

Per (1 and 2) make this:

+------------+                       +-------------+
| DT parsing |--(common structure)-->| Common code |
+------------+                       +-------------+

Then per (3) make this:

+------------+                       
| DT parsing |--(common structure)------+
+------------+                          |
                                        v
                                    +-------------+
                                    | Common code |
                                    +-------------+
                                        ^
+--------------+                        |
| ACPI parsing |--(common structure)----+
+--------------+

Thanks,
Mark.