From: cov@codeaurora.org (Christopher Covington)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH] clocksource: arch_timer: Allow the device tree to specify the physical timer
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2014 12:20:19 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5411CBC3.5080308@codeaurora.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAD=FV=XPqma5sYbn65NLEAipZFq96t_HcX96ym_cEQrqTKddOQ@mail.gmail.com>
On 09/11/2014 12:04 PM, Doug Anderson wrote:
> Christopher,
>
> On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 8:58 AM, Christopher Covington
> <cov@codeaurora.org> wrote:
>> Hi Doug,
>>
>> On 09/11/2014 11:52 AM, Doug Anderson wrote:
>>> Some 32-bit (ARMv7) systems are architected like this:
>>>
>>> * The firmware doesn't know and doesn't care about hypervisor mode and
>>> we don't want to add the complexity of hypervisor there.
>>>
>>> * The firmware isn't involved in SMP bringup or resume.
>>>
>>> * The ARCH timer come up with an uninitialized offset between the
>>> virtual and physical counters. Each core gets a different random
>>> offset.
>>>
>>> On systems like the above, it doesn't make sense to use the virtual
>>> counter. There's nobody managing the offset and each time a core goes
>>> down and comes back up it will get reinitialized to some other random
>>> value.
>>>
>>> Let's add a property to the device tree to say that we shouldn't use
>>> the virtual timer. Firmware could potentially remove this property
>>> before passing the device tree to the kernel if it really wants the
>>> kernel to use a virtual timer.
>>>
>>> Note that it's been said that ARM64 (ARMv8) systems the firmware and
>>> kernel really can't be architected as described above. That means
>>> using the physical timer like this really only makes sense for ARMv7
>>> systems.
>>>
>>> In order for this patch to do anything useful, we also need Sonny's
>>> patch at <https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/4790921/>
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Doug Anderson <dianders@chromium.org>
>>> Signed-off-by: Sonny Rao <sonnyrao@chromium.org>
>>> ---
>>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/arch_timer.txt | 6 ++++++
>>> drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c | 3 +++
>>> 2 files changed, 9 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/arch_timer.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/arch_timer.txt
>>> index 37b2caf..876d32b 100644
>>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/arch_timer.txt
>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/arch_timer.txt
>>> @@ -22,6 +22,12 @@ to deliver its interrupts via SPIs.
>>> - always-on : a boolean property. If present, the timer is powered through an
>>> always-on power domain, therefore it never loses context.
>>>
>>> +** Optional properties:
>>> +
>>> +- arm,use-physical-timer : Don't ever use the virtual timer, just use the
>>> + physical one. Not supported for ARM64.
>>> +
>>> +
>>> Example:
>>>
>>> timer {
>>> diff --git a/drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c b/drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c
>>> index 5163ec1..8ca07a9 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c
>>> @@ -649,6 +649,9 @@ static void __init arch_timer_init(struct device_node *np)
>>> arch_timer_ppi[i] = irq_of_parse_and_map(np, i);
>>> arch_timer_detect_rate(NULL, np);
>>>
>>> + if (of_property_read_bool(np, "arm,use-physical-timer"))
>>> + arch_timer_use_virtual = false;
>>> +
>>> /*
>>> * If HYP mode is available, we know that the physical timer
>>> * has been configured to be accessible from PL1. Use it, so
>>>
>>
>> How's the VDSO supposed to deal with this? It currently does:
>>
>> cycle_now = arch_counter_get_cntvct()
>
> I don't see that line of code anywhere when I do a "git grep" on linux
> or linuxnext. Can you give me a clearer pointer?
As Nathan mentioned, the code on the 32 bit side isn't merged yet.
http://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg356336.html
Christopher
--
Employee of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
hosted by the Linux Foundation.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Christopher Covington <cov@codeaurora.org>
To: Doug Anderson <dianders@chromium.org>
Cc: Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
"devicetree@vger.kernel.org" <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com>,
Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>,
Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@arm.com>,
Ian Campbell <ijc+devicetree@hellion.org.uk>,
Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>,
Stephen Boyd <sboyd@codeaurora.org>,
Sudeep Holla <Sudeep.Holla@arm.com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
Catalin Marinas <Catalin.Marinas@arm.com>,
Kumar Gala <galak@codeaurora.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Sonny Rao <sonnyrao@chromium.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
Nathan Lynch <Nathan_Lynch@mentor.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] clocksource: arch_timer: Allow the device tree to specify the physical timer
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2014 12:20:19 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5411CBC3.5080308@codeaurora.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAD=FV=XPqma5sYbn65NLEAipZFq96t_HcX96ym_cEQrqTKddOQ@mail.gmail.com>
On 09/11/2014 12:04 PM, Doug Anderson wrote:
> Christopher,
>
> On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 8:58 AM, Christopher Covington
> <cov@codeaurora.org> wrote:
>> Hi Doug,
>>
>> On 09/11/2014 11:52 AM, Doug Anderson wrote:
>>> Some 32-bit (ARMv7) systems are architected like this:
>>>
>>> * The firmware doesn't know and doesn't care about hypervisor mode and
>>> we don't want to add the complexity of hypervisor there.
>>>
>>> * The firmware isn't involved in SMP bringup or resume.
>>>
>>> * The ARCH timer come up with an uninitialized offset between the
>>> virtual and physical counters. Each core gets a different random
>>> offset.
>>>
>>> On systems like the above, it doesn't make sense to use the virtual
>>> counter. There's nobody managing the offset and each time a core goes
>>> down and comes back up it will get reinitialized to some other random
>>> value.
>>>
>>> Let's add a property to the device tree to say that we shouldn't use
>>> the virtual timer. Firmware could potentially remove this property
>>> before passing the device tree to the kernel if it really wants the
>>> kernel to use a virtual timer.
>>>
>>> Note that it's been said that ARM64 (ARMv8) systems the firmware and
>>> kernel really can't be architected as described above. That means
>>> using the physical timer like this really only makes sense for ARMv7
>>> systems.
>>>
>>> In order for this patch to do anything useful, we also need Sonny's
>>> patch at <https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/4790921/>
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Doug Anderson <dianders@chromium.org>
>>> Signed-off-by: Sonny Rao <sonnyrao@chromium.org>
>>> ---
>>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/arch_timer.txt | 6 ++++++
>>> drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c | 3 +++
>>> 2 files changed, 9 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/arch_timer.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/arch_timer.txt
>>> index 37b2caf..876d32b 100644
>>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/arch_timer.txt
>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/arch_timer.txt
>>> @@ -22,6 +22,12 @@ to deliver its interrupts via SPIs.
>>> - always-on : a boolean property. If present, the timer is powered through an
>>> always-on power domain, therefore it never loses context.
>>>
>>> +** Optional properties:
>>> +
>>> +- arm,use-physical-timer : Don't ever use the virtual timer, just use the
>>> + physical one. Not supported for ARM64.
>>> +
>>> +
>>> Example:
>>>
>>> timer {
>>> diff --git a/drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c b/drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c
>>> index 5163ec1..8ca07a9 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c
>>> @@ -649,6 +649,9 @@ static void __init arch_timer_init(struct device_node *np)
>>> arch_timer_ppi[i] = irq_of_parse_and_map(np, i);
>>> arch_timer_detect_rate(NULL, np);
>>>
>>> + if (of_property_read_bool(np, "arm,use-physical-timer"))
>>> + arch_timer_use_virtual = false;
>>> +
>>> /*
>>> * If HYP mode is available, we know that the physical timer
>>> * has been configured to be accessible from PL1. Use it, so
>>>
>>
>> How's the VDSO supposed to deal with this? It currently does:
>>
>> cycle_now = arch_counter_get_cntvct()
>
> I don't see that line of code anywhere when I do a "git grep" on linux
> or linuxnext. Can you give me a clearer pointer?
As Nathan mentioned, the code on the 32 bit side isn't merged yet.
http://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg356336.html
Christopher
--
Employee of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
hosted by the Linux Foundation.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-09-11 16:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-09-11 15:52 [PATCH] clocksource: arch_timer: Allow the device tree to specify the physical timer Doug Anderson
2014-09-11 15:52 ` Doug Anderson
2014-09-11 15:58 ` Christopher Covington
2014-09-11 15:58 ` Christopher Covington
2014-09-11 16:04 ` Doug Anderson
2014-09-11 16:04 ` Doug Anderson
2014-09-11 16:09 ` Will Deacon
2014-09-11 16:09 ` Will Deacon
2014-09-11 16:20 ` Christopher Covington [this message]
2014-09-11 16:20 ` Christopher Covington
2014-09-11 16:07 ` Nathan Lynch
2014-09-11 16:07 ` Nathan Lynch
2014-09-11 16:07 ` Nathan Lynch
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=5411CBC3.5080308@codeaurora.org \
--to=cov@codeaurora.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
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.