linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: john.stultz@linaro.org (John Stultz)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH] sched_clock: fix postinit no sched_clock function check
Date: Wed, 09 Oct 2013 16:59:18 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <5255EDD6.1050401@linaro.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <524C60F4.7000802@ti.com>

On 10/02/2013 11:07 AM, Santosh Shilimkar wrote:
> On Wednesday 02 October 2013 01:48 PM, Will Deacon wrote:
>> On Wed, Oct 02, 2013 at 06:42:40PM +0100, Stephen Boyd wrote:
>>> On 10/02/13 10:27, Santosh Shilimkar wrote:
>>>> Really... I have not created patch out of fun.
>>>> Its broken on my keystone machine at least where the sched_clock is
>>>> falling back on jiffy based sched_clock even in presence of arch_timer
>>>> sched_clock.
>>> How is that possible? sched_clock_func is only assigned by
>>> arch/arm/kernel/arch_timer.c when the architected timer is detected and
>>> sched_clock() in kernel/time/sched_clock.c calls that function pointer
>>> unconditionally. The only way I see this happening is if the architected
>>> timer rate is zero.
>>   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>
>> *cough* CNTFRQ *cough*
>>
> :) CNTFRQ as such is fine. I think the below print mis-lead me mostly. 
>
> sched_clock: ARM arch timer >56 bits at 6144kHz, resolution 162ns
> sched_clock: 32 bits at 100 Hz, resolution 10000000ns, wraps every 4294967286ms
>
> So yes, now the subject patch actually just avoids the jiffy sched_clock()
> registration and nothing else. Even without the patch arch_timer sched_clock
> will be in use.

Just wanted to follow up here, as I've not been paying close attention.
Is this issue then resolved, or is something still needed to be queued
for 3.12/3.13?

thanks
-john

  reply	other threads:[~2013-10-09 23:59 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
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 [this message]
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=5255EDD6.1050401@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).