From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: ccross@android.com (Colin Cross)
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 2010 12:37:40 -0700
Subject: [PATCH V2] [ARM] Add ARCH_PROVIDES_UDELAY config option
In-Reply-To: <1272654736-28837-1-git-send-email-ccross@android.com>
References: <1272654736-28837-1-git-send-email-ccross@android.com>
Message-ID: <u2pd73d4eaf1004301237k3ceb859dobe74fe53abec774d@mail.gmail.com>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

An alternative to this patch would be to add a config option to use
sched_clock() to provide the counter instead of the cycle loop.  The
same loops_per_jiffy calibration could be done to  determine the
sched_clock frequency.  Any machine with an available constant tick
rate counter, which is likely to be used for sched_clock() already,
can enable CONFIG_UDELAY_USES_SCHED_CLOCK.

On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 12:12 PM, Colin Cross <ccross@android.com> wrote:
> On SMP kernels, the loops_per_jiffy value is not scaled due to the
> possibility of one CPU affecting the speed of another CPU while the
> second CPU is in a udelay loop. ?Since loops_per_jiffy is calculated
> once on boot for SMP kernels, udelays are too long if the CPU
> frequency is scaled down from the boot frequency, or too short if the
> frequency is scaled up. ?Some SOCs have a timer with a constant tick
> rate that can be used to time udelays, similar to the TSC on x86.
> Provide a config flag to allow these SOCs to override the default
> ARM udelay implementation.
>
> Signed-off-by: Colin Cross <ccross@android.com>
> ---
> ?arch/arm/Kconfig ? ? ? ? ? ? | ? ?3 +++
> ?arch/arm/include/asm/delay.h | ? ?4 ++++
> ?arch/arm/lib/Makefile ? ? ? ?| ? ?6 +++++-
> ?3 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm/Kconfig b/arch/arm/Kconfig
> index 33d2825..d9923b0 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/Kconfig
> +++ b/arch/arm/Kconfig
> @@ -175,6 +175,9 @@ config ARM_L1_CACHE_SHIFT_6
> ? ? ? ?help
> ? ? ? ? ?Setting ARM L1 cache line size to 64 Bytes.
>
> +config ARCH_PROVIDES_UDELAY
> + ?bool
> +
> ?if OPROFILE
>
> ?config OPROFILE_ARMV6
> diff --git a/arch/arm/include/asm/delay.h b/arch/arm/include/asm/delay.h
> index b2deda1..57f1fa0 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/include/asm/delay.h
> +++ b/arch/arm/include/asm/delay.h
> @@ -8,6 +8,9 @@
>
> ?#include <asm/param.h> /* HZ */
>
> +#ifdef CONFIG_ARCH_PROVIDES_UDELAY
> +#include <mach/delay.h>
> +#else
> ?extern void __delay(int loops);
>
> ?/*
> @@ -40,5 +43,6 @@ extern void __const_udelay(unsigned long);
> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?__const_udelay((n) * ((2199023U*HZ)>>11))) : ? ?\
> ? ? ? ? ?__udelay(n))
>
> +#endif /* defined(ARCH_PROVIDES_UDELAY) */
> ?#endif /* defined(_ARM_DELAY_H) */
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm/lib/Makefile b/arch/arm/lib/Makefile
> index 030ba72..aa449e3 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/lib/Makefile
> +++ b/arch/arm/lib/Makefile
> @@ -6,7 +6,7 @@
>
> ?lib-y ? ? ? ? ?:= backtrace.o changebit.o csumipv6.o csumpartial.o ? \
> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? csumpartialcopy.o csumpartialcopyuser.o clearbit.o \
> - ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?delay.o findbit.o memchr.o memcpy.o ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?\
> + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?findbit.o memchr.o memcpy.o ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?\
> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? memmove.o memset.o memzero.o setbit.o ? ? ? ? ? ? ?\
> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? strncpy_from_user.o strnlen_user.o ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? \
> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? strchr.o strrchr.o ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? \
> @@ -17,6 +17,10 @@ lib-y ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?:= backtrace.o changebit.o csumipv6.o csumpartial.o ? \
>
> ?mmu-y ?:= clear_user.o copy_page.o getuser.o putuser.o
>
> +ifneq ($(CONFIG_ARCH_PROVIDES_UDELAY),y)
> + ?lib-y += delay.o
> +endif
> +
> ?# the code in uaccess.S is not preemption safe and
> ?# probably faster on ARMv3 only
> ?ifeq ($(CONFIG_PREEMPT),y)
> --
> 1.5.4.3
>
>