From: john.stultz@linaro.org (John Stultz)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH] ARM: convert arm/arm64 arch timer to use CLKSRC_OF init
Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2013 15:53:01 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5150D54D.1070004@linaro.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201303252236.23270.arnd@arndb.de>
On 03/25/2013 03:36 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Monday 25 March 2013, Rob Herring wrote:
>> I count integrator-cp, realview, versatile and non-DT VExpress that do
>> this (not surprisingly) and 25 platforms or timer implementations plus
>> arm64 that do sched_clock setup in time_init. What's broken by not
>> moving these earlier?
> timekeeping_init() will leave the persistent_clock_exist variable as "false",
> which is read in rtc_suspend() and timekeeping_inject_sleeptime().
Are you mixing up the persistent_clock and sched_clock here? From a
generic stand-point they have different requirements.
> For all I can tell, you will get a little jitter every time you
> do a suspend in that case. Or perhaps it means the system clock
> will be forwarded by the amount of time spent in suspend twice
> after wakeup, but I'm probably misreading the code for that case.
No, you shouldn't see timekeeping being incremented twice, we check in
rtc_resume code if the persistent clock is present if so we won't inject
any measured suspend time there. But you're probably right that we're
being a little overly paranoid checking the same value twice.
As far as the benefit to the persistent clock: it is just a little
better to use, since we can access it earlier in resume, prior to
interrupts being enabled. So we should see less time error introduced
each suspend.
thanks
-john
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-03-25 22:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-03-20 22:34 [PATCH] ARM: convert arm/arm64 arch timer to use CLKSRC_OF init Rob Herring
2013-03-21 11:06 ` Mark Rutland
2013-03-21 11:35 ` Marc Zyngier
2013-03-21 12:52 ` Rob Herring
2013-03-25 17:26 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-03-25 21:28 ` Rob Herring
2013-03-25 22:36 ` Arnd Bergmann
2013-03-25 22:53 ` John Stultz [this message]
2013-03-26 2:19 ` Rob Herring
2013-03-26 9:56 ` Arnd Bergmann
2013-03-25 23:07 ` Catalin Marinas
2013-04-23 21:23 ` [PATCH] ARM: OMAP: remove unused variable Arnd Bergmann
2013-04-23 21:26 ` Tony Lindgren
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=5150D54D.1070004@linaro.org \
--to=john.stultz@linaro.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).