From: linux@arm.linux.org.uk (Russell King - ARM Linux)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH] arm: sched: stop sched_clock() during suspend
Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2012 10:22:31 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20121023092231.GE28061@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CACRpkdY6ox+iJAGdSD=e7Yj55TzDWqOmLqu2fSRXvKJxqwfkhQ@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 12:28:32AM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 7:05 PM, Kevin Hilman
> <khilman@deeprootsystems.com> wrote:
>
> > However, in light of RT throttling, this a correctness issue for process
> > accounting, so I agree that this should be done for all platforms
> > instead of providing an optional 'needs suspend' version of the API,
> > even though it means printk times no longer reflect time spent
> > suspended.
>
> Maybe we should get printk() to use the best clocksource
> instead.
>
> The reason AFAICT that printk() is using sched_clock() is that
> it's supposed to be fast. But now it seems that it's not going
> to return what printk() needs anymore.
No, printk() does not need this. You think it does, but it doesn't. What
we have is a difference between ARM and x86, and this difference is breaking
the scheduler.
The fact that the printk timestamp increments while suspended is a bug. It
doesn't on x86.
There's three other functions in the kernel which do return updated time.
I'm sure one of those can be used to printk() the time passed in suspend
at resume time, which would give the information required.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-10-23 9:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-10-22 11:54 [PATCH] arm: sched: stop sched_clock() during suspend Felipe Balbi
2012-10-22 12:07 ` Felipe Balbi
2012-10-22 17:05 ` Kevin Hilman
2012-10-22 22:28 ` Linus Walleij
2012-10-23 9:22 ` Russell King - ARM Linux [this message]
2012-10-23 14:17 ` Kevin Hilman
2012-10-23 16:03 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2012-10-23 17:24 ` Felipe Balbi
2012-10-23 5:57 ` [PATCH v2] " Felipe Balbi
2012-10-23 14:14 ` Kevin Hilman
2012-10-23 10:11 ` [PATCH] " Linus Walleij
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=20121023092231.GE28061@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk \
--to=linux@arm.linux.org.uk \
--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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).