linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: sboyd@codeaurora.org (Stephen Boyd)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH] sched_clock: fix postinit no sched_clock function check
Date: Wed, 02 Oct 2013 10:22:36 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <524C565C.8010709@codeaurora.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <524C5484.5000601@ti.com>

On 10/02/13 10:14, Santosh Shilimkar wrote:
> On Wednesday 02 October 2013 01:09 PM, Will Deacon wrote:
>> On Wed, Oct 02, 2013 at 05:55:28PM +0100, Santosh Shilimkar wrote:
>>> The sched_clock code uses 2 levels of function pointers, sched_clock_func()
>>> and read_sched_clock() but the no sched_clock check in postinit() just
>>> checks read_sched_clock().
>>>
>>> This leads to kernel falling back to jiffy based sched clock even in
>>> presence of sched_clock_func() which is not desirable.
>>>
>>> Fix the postinit() check to avoid the issue. Probably the issue is hidden
>>> so far on most of the arm SOCs because of already existing sched_clock
>>> registrations apart from arch_timer sched_clock. One can reproduce the
>>> issue by just have arch_timer as sched_clock
>> Isn't this just an issue with the arch timer driver not calling
>> setup_sched_clock? Instead, we munge around with sched_clock_func directly,
>> which doesn't appear to be the way anybody else deals with this.
>>
> I thought about that option as well but was not sure since even in that case
> the check is not complete. We just ensure that function is popullated.

Yes, nothing is actually broken because sched_clock_func() won't try to
use the jiffy based read_sched_clock() function. I'm not sure we
actually need this patch besides to remove a useless timer that updates
the jiffy epoch. Can we wait until my 64-bit sched_clock patch series
lands in 3.13? It looks like I still need an ack from Will or Catalin on
the architected timer patch before the clocksource folks pick it up.

-- 
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
hosted by The Linux Foundation

  reply	other threads:[~2013-10-02 17:22 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-10-02 16:55 [PATCH] sched_clock: fix postinit no sched_clock function check Santosh Shilimkar
2013-10-02 17:09 ` Will Deacon
2013-10-02 17:14   ` Santosh Shilimkar
2013-10-02 17:22     ` Stephen Boyd [this message]
2013-10-02 17:27       ` Santosh Shilimkar
2013-10-02 17:42         ` Stephen Boyd
2013-10-02 17:48           ` Will Deacon
2013-10-02 18:07             ` Santosh Shilimkar
2013-10-09 23:59               ` John Stultz
2013-10-10  0:15                 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2013-10-02 18:14           ` Rob Herring

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=524C565C.8010709@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).