* [Adeos-main] [PATCH] ipipe i.MXL freeze's boot
@ 2009-02-25 11:05 Gwenhaël
2009-02-25 13:06 ` Gilles Chanteperdrix
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Gwenhaël @ 2009-02-25 11:05 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: adeos-main
With i.MXL processor, kernel patched with
adeos-2.6.27-ipipe-1.12-00.patch wait indefinitly for timer
calibration.
Tick event never appear. This patch modify acktimer() in
arch/arm/mach-imx/time.c.
I need to know if this modification is good (without adding
new errors).
Thank you very much
Gwenhael
Signed-off-by: gwenhael.goavec-merou@domain.hid
---- diff -ru a/arch/arm/mach-imx/irq.c b/arch/arm/mach-imx/irq.c
--- a/arch/arm/mach-imx/irq.c 2009-02-17 11:32:52.000000000 +0100
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-imx/irq.c 2009-02-23 14:12:43.000000000 +0100
@@ -35,7 +35,7 @@
#include <asm/io.h>
#include <asm/mach/irq.h>
-#include <asm/arch/imx-regs.h>
+#include <mach/imx-regs.h>
/* Used for IMX INTERRUPT priority: Still Experimental */
diff -ru a/arch/arm/mach-imx/time.c b/arch/arm/mach-imx/time.c
--- a/arch/arm/mach-imx/time.c 2009-02-24 15:26:42.000000000 +0100
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-imx/time.c 2009-02-24 15:24:45.000000000 +0100
@@ -294,7 +294,12 @@
#ifdef CONFIG_IPIPE
void __ipipe_mach_acktimer(void)
{
+ uint32_t tstat;
+ tstat = IMX_TSTAT(TIMER_BASE);
IMX_TSTAT(TIMER_BASE) = 0;
+ if (likely(tstat & TSTAT_COMP)) {
+ ipipe_mach_update_tsc(void);
+ }
}
static void ipipe_mach_update_tsc(void)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [Adeos-main] [PATCH] ipipe i.MXL freeze's boot
2009-02-25 11:05 [Adeos-main] [PATCH] ipipe i.MXL freeze's boot Gwenhaël
@ 2009-02-25 13:06 ` Gilles Chanteperdrix
2009-02-25 15:09 ` Gwenhaël
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Gilles Chanteperdrix @ 2009-02-25 13:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: adeos-main
Gwenhaël wrote:
> With i.MXL processor, kernel patched with
> adeos-2.6.27-ipipe-1.12-00.patch wait indefinitly for timer
> calibration.
> Tick event never appear. This patch modify acktimer() in
> arch/arm/mach-imx/time.c.
>
> I need to know if this modification is good (without adding
> new errors).
ipipe_mach_update_tsc should be called from imx_timer_interrupt, so,
there is no need to call it from acktimer (and in fact, avoiding the
call to update_tsc in acktimer reduces the timer interrupt latency). So,
maybe what is needed and is missing is simply to read
IMX_TSTAT(TIMER_BASE) ?
--
Gilles.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [Adeos-main] [PATCH] ipipe i.MXL freeze's boot
2009-02-25 13:06 ` Gilles Chanteperdrix
@ 2009-02-25 15:09 ` Gwenhaël
2009-02-25 15:14 ` Gilles Chanteperdrix
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Gwenhaël @ 2009-02-25 15:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: adeos-main
On Wed, 25 Feb 2009 14:06:14 +0100, Gilles Chanteperdrix
<gilles.chanteperdrix@xenomai.org> wrote:
> Gwenhaël wrote:
>> With i.MXL processor, kernel patched with
>> adeos-2.6.27-ipipe-1.12-00.patch wait indefinitly for timer
>> calibration.
>> Tick event never appear. This patch modify acktimer() in
>> arch/arm/mach-imx/time.c.
>>
>> I need to know if this modification is good (without adding
>> new errors).
>
> ipipe_mach_update_tsc should be called from imx_timer_interrupt, so,
> there is no need to call it from acktimer (and in fact, avoiding the
> call to update_tsc in acktimer reduces the timer interrupt latency). So,
> maybe what is needed and is missing is simply to read
> IMX_TSTAT(TIMER_BASE) ?
I've made modifications on patch thanks to your assumption.
The new patch work fine.
Thank you very much
Gwenhael
Signed-off-by: gwenhael.goavec-merou@domain.hid
diff -ru a/arch/arm/mach-imx/irq.c b/arch/arm/mach-imx/irq.c
--- a/arch/arm/mach-imx/irq.c 2009-02-17 11:32:52.000000000 +0100
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-imx/irq.c 2009-02-23 14:12:43.000000000 +0100
@@ -35,7 +35,7 @@
#include <asm/io.h>
#include <asm/mach/irq.h>
-#include <asm/arch/imx-regs.h>
+#include <mach/imx-regs.h>
/* Used for IMX INTERRUPT priority: Still Experimental */
diff -ru a/arch/arm/mach-imx/time.c b/arch/arm/mach-imx/time.c
--- a/arch/arm/mach-imx/time.c 2009-02-25 15:10:01.000000000 +0100
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-imx/time.c 2009-02-25 15:10:49.000000000 +0100
@@ -89,25 +89,23 @@
imx_timer_interrupt(int irq, void *dev_id)
{
struct clock_event_device *evt = &clockevent_imx;
-#ifndef CONFIG_IPIPE
uint32_t tstat;
irqreturn_t ret = IRQ_NONE;
/* clear the interrupt */
tstat = IMX_TSTAT(TIMER_BASE);
+#ifndef CONFIG_IPIPE
IMX_TSTAT(TIMER_BASE) = 0;
+#endif
if (tstat & TSTAT_COMP) {
+#ifdef CONFIG_IPIPE
ipipe_mach_update_tsc();
+#endif
evt->event_handler(evt);
ret = IRQ_HANDLED;
}
return ret;
-#else /* CONFIG_IPIPE */
- ipipe_mach_update_tsc();
- evt->event_handler(evt);
- return IRQ_HANDLED;
-#endif /* CONFIG_IPIPE */
}
static struct irqaction imx_timer_irq = {
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [Adeos-main] [PATCH] ipipe i.MXL freeze's boot
2009-02-25 15:09 ` Gwenhaël
@ 2009-02-25 15:14 ` Gilles Chanteperdrix
2009-02-26 16:33 ` Gilles Chanteperdrix
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Gilles Chanteperdrix @ 2009-02-25 15:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: adeos-main
Gwenhaël wrote:
> On Wed, 25 Feb 2009 14:06:14 +0100, Gilles Chanteperdrix
> <gilles.chanteperdrix@xenomai.org> wrote:
>> Gwenhaël wrote:
>>> With i.MXL processor, kernel patched with
>>> adeos-2.6.27-ipipe-1.12-00.patch wait indefinitly for timer
>>> calibration.
>>> Tick event never appear. This patch modify acktimer() in
>>> arch/arm/mach-imx/time.c.
>>>
>>> I need to know if this modification is good (without adding
>>> new errors).
>> ipipe_mach_update_tsc should be called from imx_timer_interrupt, so,
>> there is no need to call it from acktimer (and in fact, avoiding the
>> call to update_tsc in acktimer reduces the timer interrupt latency). So,
>> maybe what is needed and is missing is simply to read
>> IMX_TSTAT(TIMER_BASE) ?
>
> I've made modifications on patch thanks to your assumption.
> The new patch work fine.
>
> Thank you very much
>
> Gwenhael
>
> Signed-off-by: gwenhael.goavec-merou@domain.hid
>
>
> diff -ru a/arch/arm/mach-imx/irq.c b/arch/arm/mach-imx/irq.c
> --- a/arch/arm/mach-imx/irq.c 2009-02-17 11:32:52.000000000 +0100
> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-imx/irq.c 2009-02-23 14:12:43.000000000 +0100
> @@ -35,7 +35,7 @@
> #include <asm/io.h>
>
> #include <asm/mach/irq.h>
> -#include <asm/arch/imx-regs.h>
> +#include <mach/imx-regs.h>
>
>
> /* Used for IMX INTERRUPT priority: Still Experimental */
> diff -ru a/arch/arm/mach-imx/time.c b/arch/arm/mach-imx/time.c
> --- a/arch/arm/mach-imx/time.c 2009-02-25 15:10:01.000000000 +0100
> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-imx/time.c 2009-02-25 15:10:49.000000000 +0100
> @@ -89,25 +89,23 @@
> imx_timer_interrupt(int irq, void *dev_id)
> {
> struct clock_event_device *evt = &clockevent_imx;
> -#ifndef CONFIG_IPIPE
> uint32_t tstat;
> irqreturn_t ret = IRQ_NONE;
>
> /* clear the interrupt */
> tstat = IMX_TSTAT(TIMER_BASE);
> +#ifndef CONFIG_IPIPE
> IMX_TSTAT(TIMER_BASE) = 0;
> +#endif
> if (tstat & TSTAT_COMP) {
> +#ifdef CONFIG_IPIPE
> ipipe_mach_update_tsc();
> +#endif
> evt->event_handler(evt);
> ret = IRQ_HANDLED;
> }
>
> return ret;
> -#else /* CONFIG_IPIPE */
> - ipipe_mach_update_tsc();
> - evt->event_handler(evt);
> - return IRQ_HANDLED;
> -#endif /* CONFIG_IPIPE */
> }
>
> static struct irqaction imx_timer_irq = {
No, that is still wrong. You should read IMX_TSTAT(TIMER_BASE) in
acktimer not in linux timer interrupt. When running with xenomai, the
linux timer interrupt is a virtual interrupt and should not touch hardware.
--
Gilles.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [Adeos-main] [PATCH] ipipe i.MXL freeze's boot
2009-02-25 15:14 ` Gilles Chanteperdrix
@ 2009-02-26 16:33 ` Gilles Chanteperdrix
2009-02-27 21:23 ` gwenhael.goavec
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Gilles Chanteperdrix @ 2009-02-26 16:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: adeos-main, Gwenhaël
Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote:
> Gwenhaël wrote:
>> On Wed, 25 Feb 2009 14:06:14 +0100, Gilles Chanteperdrix
>> <gilles.chanteperdrix@xenomai.org> wrote:
>>> Gwenhaël wrote:
>>>> With i.MXL processor, kernel patched with
>>>> adeos-2.6.27-ipipe-1.12-00.patch wait indefinitly for timer
>>>> calibration.
>>>> Tick event never appear. This patch modify acktimer() in
>>>> arch/arm/mach-imx/time.c.
>>>>
>>>> I need to know if this modification is good (without adding
>>>> new errors).
>>> ipipe_mach_update_tsc should be called from imx_timer_interrupt, so,
>>> there is no need to call it from acktimer (and in fact, avoiding the
>>> call to update_tsc in acktimer reduces the timer interrupt latency). So,
>>> maybe what is needed and is missing is simply to read
>>> IMX_TSTAT(TIMER_BASE) ?
>> I've made modifications on patch thanks to your assumption.
>> The new patch work fine.
>>
>> Thank you very much
>>
>> Gwenhael
>>
>> Signed-off-by: gwenhael.goavec-merou@domain.hid
>>
>>
>> diff -ru a/arch/arm/mach-imx/irq.c b/arch/arm/mach-imx/irq.c
>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-imx/irq.c 2009-02-17 11:32:52.000000000 +0100
>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-imx/irq.c 2009-02-23 14:12:43.000000000 +0100
>> @@ -35,7 +35,7 @@
>> #include <asm/io.h>
>>
>> #include <asm/mach/irq.h>
>> -#include <asm/arch/imx-regs.h>
>> +#include <mach/imx-regs.h>
>>
>>
>> /* Used for IMX INTERRUPT priority: Still Experimental */
>> diff -ru a/arch/arm/mach-imx/time.c b/arch/arm/mach-imx/time.c
>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-imx/time.c 2009-02-25 15:10:01.000000000 +0100
>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-imx/time.c 2009-02-25 15:10:49.000000000 +0100
>> @@ -89,25 +89,23 @@
>> imx_timer_interrupt(int irq, void *dev_id)
>> {
>> struct clock_event_device *evt = &clockevent_imx;
>> -#ifndef CONFIG_IPIPE
>> uint32_t tstat;
>> irqreturn_t ret = IRQ_NONE;
>>
>> /* clear the interrupt */
>> tstat = IMX_TSTAT(TIMER_BASE);
>> +#ifndef CONFIG_IPIPE
>> IMX_TSTAT(TIMER_BASE) = 0;
>> +#endif
>> if (tstat & TSTAT_COMP) {
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_IPIPE
>> ipipe_mach_update_tsc();
>> +#endif
>> evt->event_handler(evt);
>> ret = IRQ_HANDLED;
>> }
>>
>> return ret;
>> -#else /* CONFIG_IPIPE */
>> - ipipe_mach_update_tsc();
>> - evt->event_handler(evt);
>> - return IRQ_HANDLED;
>> -#endif /* CONFIG_IPIPE */
>> }
>>
>> static struct irqaction imx_timer_irq = {
>
> No, that is still wrong. You should read IMX_TSTAT(TIMER_BASE) in
> acktimer not in linux timer interrupt. When running with xenomai, the
> linux timer interrupt is a virtual interrupt and should not touch hardware.
>
Hi Gwenhaël,
any news about this issue ?
Regards.
--
Gilles.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [Adeos-main] [PATCH] ipipe i.MXL freeze's boot
2009-02-26 16:33 ` Gilles Chanteperdrix
@ 2009-02-27 21:23 ` gwenhael.goavec
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: gwenhael.goavec @ 2009-02-27 21:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: adeos-main
On Thu, 26 Feb 2009 17:33:12 +0100
Gilles Chanteperdrix <gilles.chanteperdrix@xenomai.org>
wrote:
> >
>
> Hi Gwenhaël,
>
> any news about this issue ?
>
> Regards.
>
> --
> Gilles.
>
Yes,
I'm sorry for the late.
This patch seem correct for the Adeos i'MXL support.
The first part is only usefull for 2.6.27 and 2.6.28.
The second part is for 2.6.2{6,7,8}
Regards
Gwenhaël
Signed-off-by: gwenhael.goavec-merou@domain.hid
diff -ru a/arch/arm/mach-imx/irq.c b/arch/arm/mach-imx/irq.c
--- a/arch/arm/mach-imx/irq.c 2009-02-17 11:32:52.000000000 +0100
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-imx/irq.c 2009-02-23 14:12:43.000000000 +0100
@@ -35,7 +35,7 @@
#include <asm/io.h>
#include <asm/mach/irq.h>
-#include <asm/arch/imx-regs.h>
+#include <mach/imx-regs.h>
/* Used for IMX INTERRUPT priority: Still Experimental */
diff -ru a/arch/arm/mach-imx/time.c b/arch/arm/mach-imx/time.c
--- a/arch/arm/mach-imx/time.c 2009-02-25 17:03:34.000000000 +0100
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-imx/time.c 2009-02-25 16:36:16.000000000 +0100
@@ -294,6 +294,8 @@
#ifdef CONFIG_IPIPE
void __ipipe_mach_acktimer(void)
{
+ uint32_t tstat;
+ tstat = IMX_TSTAT(TIMER_BASE);
IMX_TSTAT(TIMER_BASE) = 0;
}
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2009-02-27 21:23 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2009-02-25 11:05 [Adeos-main] [PATCH] ipipe i.MXL freeze's boot Gwenhaël
2009-02-25 13:06 ` Gilles Chanteperdrix
2009-02-25 15:09 ` Gwenhaël
2009-02-25 15:14 ` Gilles Chanteperdrix
2009-02-26 16:33 ` Gilles Chanteperdrix
2009-02-27 21:23 ` gwenhael.goavec
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.