Hi Mark, Marc,
Sorry for missing you in the cc list Do you have any suggestion for the arm_arch_timer patches? Could you help me to review these patches ?
Great thanks !
On 13 September 2016 at 17:22, Fu Wei fu.wei@linaro.org wrote:
Hi Thomas, Daniel,
For these arm_arch_timer patches, do you have any other suggestion or comment? I have deleted "skipping" in the error message.
I have prepared v12 (rebase to rc6 and on the top of IORT v11), should I send it now (if you are OK with my arm_arch_timer patches ), or anything I can do to improve this patchset ?
Thanks.
On 7 September 2016 at 17:23, Fu Wei fu.wei@linaro.org wrote:
Hi Thomas
On 6 September 2016 at 22:36, Thomas Gleixner tglx@linutronix.de wrote:
On Tue, 6 Sep 2016, fu.wei@linaro.org wrote:
if (timer_count < 0)pr_err("Failed to get platform timer info, skipping.\n");So this prints something about skipping. But then it continues as if nothing went wrong. That's either wrong or confusing or both.
yes, you are right, this info is confusing. maybe we just delete the "skipping" ?
“timer_count < 0” is caused by some firmware bug, in gtdt.c:
int __init acpi_gtdt_init(struct acpi_table_header *table) { ...... if (start < (void *)table + sizeof(struct acpi_table_gtdt)) { pr_err(FW_BUG "Failed to retrieve timer info from firmware: invalid data.\n"); return -EINVAL; ...... }
But in this situation( without platform timers ), system still can work. So I thing we just need to print a error.
arch_timer_init();return 0;
return arch_timer_init();Thanks,
tglx-- Best regards,
Fu Wei Software Engineer Red Hat
-- Best regards,
Fu Wei Software Engineer Red Hat