From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: marc.zyngier@arm.com (Marc Zyngier) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2012 18:50:46 +0000 Subject: [PATCH v2 1/3] ARM: davinci: convert to common sched_clock() implementation In-Reply-To: References: <1326903292-15794-1-git-send-email-marc.zyngier@arm.com> <1326903292-15794-2-git-send-email-marc.zyngier@arm.com> Message-ID: <4F171486.80105@arm.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org Hi Sekhar, On 18/01/12 18:36, Nori, Sekhar wrote: > On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 21:44:50, Marc Zyngier wrote: >> Davinci has its own sched_clock() implementation, which gets in the >> way of a single zImage. Moving to the common sched_clock framework >> makes the code slightly cleaner. >> >> Cc: Sekhar Nori >> Cc: Kevin Hilman >> Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier > > Tested this on DaVinci DM365 and works well. Thanks for giving it a go. >> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-davinci/time.c b/arch/arm/mach-davinci/time.c >> index e1969ce..187fcda 100644 >> --- a/arch/arm/mach-davinci/time.c >> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-davinci/time.c >> @@ -20,6 +20,7 @@ >> #include >> >> #include >> +#include >> #include >> #include >> #include > > I did not like the fact that the asm/ and mach/ headers > are intermixed in this file so I created a patch to > fix that while I was doing the common sched_clock() conversion. > > http://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg153506.html > > Can you please rebase your patch on that? Sure. I can probably merge that patch altogether in mine if you want. > If you are planning to take this from outside of DaVinci tree, > feel free to add my: > > Acked-by: Sekhar Nori Thanks. Ideally, I'd like all 3 patches to be kept together, otherwise we may end up with patch 3 being applied before patch 1, breaking your platform. Cheers, M. -- Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...