From: Timur Tabi <timur@codeaurora.org>
To: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>, Pratyush Anand <panand@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-watchdog@vger.kernel.org, kexec@lists.infradead.org,
open list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
wim@iguana.be, fu.wei@linaro.org, Suravee.Suthikulpanit@amd.com,
Dave Young <dyoung@redhat.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] Watchdog: sbsa_gwdt: Enhance timeout range
Date: Thu, 5 May 2016 18:45:52 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <572BDB30.9060602@codeaurora.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <572BD959.3090507@codeaurora.org>
Timur Tabi wrote:
>
>> A 32-bit counter is absolutely fine. Letting it run with a 400MHz clock
>> (or was it 200 MHz ?) is the problem. A resolution of 2.5ns for a
>> watchdog
>> timer does not really make any sense.
>
> The 10 second limit is based on a 20MHz clock.
No, that's not true. I misread the code. I knew something was wrong,
but it didn't click until just now.
The default timeout is 10 seconds. The max timeout on a 20MHz system
(which is what we're running) is over 200 seconds.
The problem is that Pratyush's system is running at a clock that's way
too fast:
[ 131.187562] sbsa-gwdt sbsa-gwdt.0: Initialized with 40s timeout @
250000000 Hz, action=1.
250MHz is unreasonable. Pratyush, why is your system counter so high?
On our ARM64 system, it's set to 20MHz.
--
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora
Forum, a Linux Foundation collaborative project.
_______________________________________________
kexec mailing list
kexec@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Timur Tabi <timur@codeaurora.org>
To: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>, Pratyush Anand <panand@redhat.com>
Cc: fu.wei@linaro.org, Suravee.Suthikulpanit@amd.com, wim@iguana.be,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-watchdog@vger.kernel.org,
open list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Dave Young <dyoung@redhat.com>,
kexec@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] Watchdog: sbsa_gwdt: Enhance timeout range
Date: Thu, 5 May 2016 18:45:52 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <572BDB30.9060602@codeaurora.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <572BD959.3090507@codeaurora.org>
Timur Tabi wrote:
>
>> A 32-bit counter is absolutely fine. Letting it run with a 400MHz clock
>> (or was it 200 MHz ?) is the problem. A resolution of 2.5ns for a
>> watchdog
>> timer does not really make any sense.
>
> The 10 second limit is based on a 20MHz clock.
No, that's not true. I misread the code. I knew something was wrong,
but it didn't click until just now.
The default timeout is 10 seconds. The max timeout on a 20MHz system
(which is what we're running) is over 200 seconds.
The problem is that Pratyush's system is running at a clock that's way
too fast:
[ 131.187562] sbsa-gwdt sbsa-gwdt.0: Initialized with 40s timeout @
250000000 Hz, action=1.
250MHz is unreasonable. Pratyush, why is your system counter so high?
On our ARM64 system, it's set to 20MHz.
--
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora
Forum, a Linux Foundation collaborative project.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: timur@codeaurora.org (Timur Tabi)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH RFC] Watchdog: sbsa_gwdt: Enhance timeout range
Date: Thu, 5 May 2016 18:45:52 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <572BDB30.9060602@codeaurora.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <572BD959.3090507@codeaurora.org>
Timur Tabi wrote:
>
>> A 32-bit counter is absolutely fine. Letting it run with a 400MHz clock
>> (or was it 200 MHz ?) is the problem. A resolution of 2.5ns for a
>> watchdog
>> timer does not really make any sense.
>
> The 10 second limit is based on a 20MHz clock.
No, that's not true. I misread the code. I knew something was wrong,
but it didn't click until just now.
The default timeout is 10 seconds. The max timeout on a 20MHz system
(which is what we're running) is over 200 seconds.
The problem is that Pratyush's system is running at a clock that's way
too fast:
[ 131.187562] sbsa-gwdt sbsa-gwdt.0: Initialized with 40s timeout @
250000000 Hz, action=1.
250MHz is unreasonable. Pratyush, why is your system counter so high?
On our ARM64 system, it's set to 20MHz.
--
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora
Forum, a Linux Foundation collaborative project.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-05-05 23:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 55+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-05-03 8:20 [PATCH RFC] Watchdog: sbsa_gwdt: Enhance timeout range Pratyush Anand
2016-05-03 8:20 ` Pratyush Anand
2016-05-03 12:12 ` Timur Tabi
2016-05-03 12:12 ` Timur Tabi
2016-05-03 13:24 ` Pratyush Anand
2016-05-03 13:24 ` Pratyush Anand
2016-05-03 13:47 ` Guenter Roeck
2016-05-03 13:47 ` Guenter Roeck
2016-05-03 14:17 ` Pratyush Anand
2016-05-03 14:17 ` Pratyush Anand
2016-05-03 14:46 ` Guenter Roeck
2016-05-03 14:46 ` Guenter Roeck
2016-05-03 15:04 ` Timur Tabi
2016-05-03 15:04 ` Timur Tabi
2016-05-03 13:29 ` Guenter Roeck
2016-05-03 13:29 ` Guenter Roeck
2016-05-03 14:38 ` Pratyush Anand
2016-05-03 14:38 ` Pratyush Anand
2016-05-03 15:07 ` Timur Tabi
2016-05-03 15:07 ` Timur Tabi
2016-05-03 15:51 ` Pratyush Anand
2016-05-03 15:51 ` Pratyush Anand
2016-05-03 17:16 ` Guenter Roeck
2016-05-03 17:16 ` Guenter Roeck
2016-05-04 14:14 ` Pratyush Anand
2016-05-04 14:14 ` Pratyush Anand
2016-05-04 14:21 ` Timur Tabi
2016-05-04 14:21 ` Timur Tabi
2016-05-04 15:59 ` Pratyush Anand
2016-05-04 15:59 ` Pratyush Anand
2016-05-04 16:17 ` Timur Tabi
2016-05-04 16:17 ` Timur Tabi
2016-05-05 16:43 ` Guenter Roeck
2016-05-05 16:43 ` Guenter Roeck
2016-05-05 18:20 ` Pratyush Anand
2016-05-05 18:20 ` Pratyush Anand
2016-05-05 18:20 ` Pratyush Anand
2016-05-05 18:22 ` Timur Tabi
2016-05-05 18:22 ` Timur Tabi
2016-05-05 18:22 ` Timur Tabi
2016-05-05 23:36 ` Guenter Roeck
2016-05-05 23:36 ` Guenter Roeck
2016-05-05 23:36 ` Guenter Roeck
2016-05-05 23:38 ` Timur Tabi
2016-05-05 23:38 ` Timur Tabi
2016-05-05 23:38 ` Timur Tabi
2016-05-05 23:45 ` Timur Tabi [this message]
2016-05-05 23:45 ` Timur Tabi
2016-05-05 23:45 ` Timur Tabi
2016-05-06 0:18 ` Guenter Roeck
2016-05-06 0:18 ` Guenter Roeck
2016-05-06 0:18 ` Guenter Roeck
2016-05-05 23:51 ` Guenter Roeck
2016-05-05 23:51 ` Guenter Roeck
2016-05-05 23:51 ` Guenter Roeck
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=572BDB30.9060602@codeaurora.org \
--to=timur@codeaurora.org \
--cc=Suravee.Suthikulpanit@amd.com \
--cc=dyoung@redhat.com \
--cc=fu.wei@linaro.org \
--cc=kexec@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-watchdog@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@roeck-us.net \
--cc=panand@redhat.com \
--cc=wim@iguana.be \
/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.