From: sboyd@codeaurora.org (Stephen Boyd)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH 2/2] ARM: delay: allow timer-based delay implementation to be selected
Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2012 14:39:10 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4FE8DA7E.5040105@codeaurora.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1340377774-17173-3-git-send-email-will.deacon@arm.com>
On 06/22/12 08:09, Will Deacon wrote:
> diff --git a/arch/arm/kernel/arch_timer.c b/arch/arm/kernel/arch_timer.c
> index dbbeec4..675cee0 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/kernel/arch_timer.c
> +++ b/arch/arm/kernel/arch_timer.c
> @@ -32,6 +32,8 @@ static int arch_timer_ppi2;
>
> static struct clock_event_device __percpu **arch_timer_evt;
>
> +extern void init_current_timer_delay(unsigned long freq);
Can we find a home for this in some header file?
> +static void __timer_const_udelay(unsigned long xloops)
> +{
> + unsigned long long loops = xloops;
> + loops *= loops_per_jiffy;
> + __timer_delay(loops >> 30);
> +}
Is it ok to have a 64 bit multiply here? It seems the assembly version
tries to keep it all 32 bit math.
> +
> +static void __timer_udelay(unsigned long usecs)
> +{
> + __timer_const_udelay(usecs * ((2199023U * HZ) >> 11));
> +}
It's unfortunate that we have to duplicate the same code and constants
in both C and assembly. With my approach we convert delay.S into C and
avoid the duplication.
> +
> +void __init init_current_timer_delay(unsigned long freq)
> +{
> + pr_info("Switching to timer-based delay loop\n");
Might be worth printing the frequency here too.
--
Sent by an employee of the Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-06-25 21:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-06-22 15:09 [PATCH 0/2] Use architected timers for delay loop Will Deacon
2012-06-22 15:09 ` [PATCH 1/2] ARM: arch timer: implement read_current_timer and get_cycles Will Deacon
2012-06-25 21:39 ` Stephen Boyd
2012-06-26 10:37 ` Will Deacon
2012-06-26 17:44 ` Stephen Boyd
2012-06-22 15:09 ` [PATCH 2/2] ARM: delay: allow timer-based delay implementation to be selected Will Deacon
2012-06-25 21:39 ` Stephen Boyd [this message]
2012-06-26 10:49 ` Will Deacon
2012-06-26 15:54 ` Will Deacon
2012-06-26 16:00 ` Rob Herring
2012-06-26 16:28 ` Will Deacon
2012-06-27 2:07 ` Stephen Boyd
2012-06-27 9:41 ` Will Deacon
2012-06-22 22:26 ` [PATCH 0/2] Use architected timers for delay loop Russell King - ARM Linux
2012-06-25 10:03 ` Will Deacon
2012-06-25 21:38 ` Stephen Boyd
2012-06-26 10:35 ` Will Deacon
2012-06-26 17:42 ` Stephen Boyd
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=4FE8DA7E.5040105@codeaurora.org \
--to=sboyd@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 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).