From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Russell King - ARM Linux Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 03/17] sched_clock: Use an hrtimer instead of timer Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2013 20:07:17 +0100 Message-ID: <20130722190717.GO24642@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> References: <1374189690-10810-1-git-send-email-sboyd@codeaurora.org> <1374189690-10810-4-git-send-email-sboyd@codeaurora.org> <51ED781F.6060300@linaro.org> <51ED7DD5.8010000@codeaurora.org> <51ED80E7.4050606@codeaurora.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <51ED80E7.4050606@codeaurora.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Stephen Boyd Cc: John Stultz , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Thomas Gleixner , Catalin Marinas , Will Deacon , Christopher Covington List-Id: linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 11:58:47AM -0700, Stephen Boyd wrote: > On 07/22/13 11:45, Stephen Boyd wrote: > > Hmm. Is it too early to use hrtimers? Moving the hrtimer_start() into > > sched_clock_register() also causes the same crash. > > Yes that seems to be the problem. The vexpress board is setting up the > sched_clock in setup_arch() (via v2m_init_early) which runs before > hrtimers_init(). I've only tested this on boards that setup the timer in > the time_init() callback which runs after hrtimers_init(). Your patch > should be fine, although it would be nice if we didn't have callers > setting up the sched_clock so early. However, it _is_ the correct place to do it, as I've repeatedly stated. The reason for this is that the scheduler will have already read from sched_clock() by the time you get to timer_init() to seed its idea of the start time for PID0 - again, as I've explained multiple times.