[U-Boot] [PATCH 07/10] x86: Add I/O APIC register access inline routines

[Bin Meng]

Hi Simon,

On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 9:15 PM, Simon Glass <sjg at chromium.org> wrote:
> Hi Bin,
>
> On 17 June 2015 at 01:35, Bin Meng <bmeng.cn at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi Simon,
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 16, 2015 at 10:46 AM, Simon Glass <sjg at chromium.org> wrote:
>>> Hi Bin,
>>>
>>> On 15 June 2015 at 01:59, Bin Meng <bmeng.cn at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> I/O APIC registers are addressed indirectly. Add io_apic_read() and
>>>> io_apic_write() inline routines. Two macros for I/O APIC ID and
>>>> version register offset are also added.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Bin Meng <bmeng.cn at gmail.com>
>>>> ---
>>>>
>>>>  arch/x86/include/asm/ioapic.h | 34 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>  1 file changed, 34 insertions(+)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/ioapic.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/ioapic.h
>>>> index f5d69db..697eabb 100644
>>>> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/ioapic.h
>>>> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/ioapic.h
>>>> @@ -9,10 +9,44 @@
>>>>  #ifndef __ASM_IOAPIC_H
>>>>  #define __ASM_IOAPIC_H
>>>>
>>>> +#include <asm/io.h>
>>>> +
>>>>  #define IO_APIC_ADDR           0xfec00000
>>>>
>>>>  /* Direct addressed register */
>>>>  #define IO_APIC_INDEX          (IO_APIC_ADDR + 0x00)
>>>>  #define IO_APIC_DATA           (IO_APIC_ADDR + 0x10)
>>>>
>>>> +/* Indirect addressed register offset */
>>>> +#define IO_APIC_ID             0x00
>>>> +#define IO_APIC_VER            0x01
>>>> +
>>>> +/**
>>>> + * io_apic_read() - Read I/O APIC register
>>>> + *
>>>> + * This routine reads I/O APIC indirect addressed register.
>>>> + *
>>>> + * @reg:       address of indirect addressed register
>>>> + * @return:    register value to read
>>>> + */
>>>> +static inline u32 io_apic_read(u32 reg)
>>>> +{
>>>> +       writel(reg, IO_APIC_INDEX);
>>>> +       return readl(IO_APIC_DATA);
>>>> +}
>>>
>>> Is there any reason these need to be inline?
>>>
>>
>> No, but I was referring to asm/lapic.h inside which the lapic register
>> access routines are inline as well. Do you want to remove inline for
>> lapic and ioapic?
>>
>> [snip]
>
> I'm really just wondering why they are inline. I can't see any
> advantage myself. If you agree, then yes let's remove inline for both.
>
> If there is a reason for inline, then let's take this patch as is.
>

Agree. Let's remove the inline. I will prepare a v2.

Regards,
Bin