From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: daniel.lezcano@linaro.org (Daniel Lezcano) Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2018 14:07:34 +0200 Subject: [PATCH v3 0/6] clocksource: rework Atmel TCB timer driver In-Reply-To: <20180329114255.GL13942@piout.net> References: <20180223171558.7037-1-alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com> <3478710.yJBBt3uoRT@ada> <20180329104542.GK13942@piout.net> <3103570.fW0XyqvKVi@ada> <20180329114255.GL13942@piout.net> Message-ID: To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 29/03/2018 13:42, Alexandre Belloni wrote: > On 29/03/2018 at 13:31:18 +0200, Alexander Dahl wrote: >> Pretty sure. I rebuilt the whole BSP and added another line to the kernel >> source to see if the tree I applied the patches to, was actually built: >> >> >> diff --git a/drivers/clocksource/timer-atmel-tcb.c b/drivers/clocksource/timer-atmel-tcb.c >> index 7fde9cfbf203..f85affc74a86 100644 >> --- a/drivers/clocksource/timer-atmel-tcb.c >> +++ b/drivers/clocksource/timer-atmel-tcb.c >> @@ -222,7 +222,8 @@ static int __init tc_clkevt_register(struct device_node *node, >> goto err_slow; >> clk_disable(tce.clk); >> >> - clockevents_config_and_register(&tce.clkevt, 32768, 1, bits - 1); >> + pr_info( "*** bits: 0x%x, BIT(bits): 0x%lx\n", bits, BIT(bits) ); >> + clockevents_config_and_register(&tce.clkevt, 32768, 1, BIT(bits) - 1); >> >> ret = request_irq(tce.irq, tc_clkevt2_irq, IRQF_TIMER | IRQF_SHARED, >> tce.clkevt.name, &tce); >> >> > > I've just tested on a g20, old driver: > INT NAME RATE MAX > 16 [vel at91_tick,] 175 Ints/s (max: 231) > 19 [ vel tc_clkevt] 129 Ints/s (max: 129) > > > new driver: > INT NAME RATE MAX > 17 [vel timer at fffa] 129 Ints/s (max: 129) > 18 [ vel ttyS0] 175 Ints/s (max: 231) Can you give in both platforms how fast the clocksource wraps up ? -- Linaro.org ? Open source software for ARM SoCs Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog