* [PATCH] DEC init_cycle_counter
@ 2000-12-02 12:27 Florian Lohoff
2000-12-02 13:02 ` Juan J. Quintela
` (2 more replies)
0 siblings, 3 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Florian Lohoff @ 2000-12-02 12:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-mips
Comments ?
Index: time.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/linux/arch/mips/dec/time.c,v
retrieving revision 1.11
diff -u -r1.11 arch/mips/dec/time.c
--- arch/mips/dec/time.c 2000/11/23 02:00:49 1.11
+++ arch/mips/dec/time.c 2000/12/02 12:20:09
@@ -423,46 +423,6 @@
timer_interrupt(irq, dev_id, regs);
}
-char cyclecounter_available;
-
-static inline void init_cycle_counter(void)
-{
- switch (mips_cputype) {
- case CPU_UNKNOWN:
- case CPU_R2000:
- case CPU_R3000:
- case CPU_R3000A:
- case CPU_R3041:
- case CPU_R3051:
- case CPU_R3052:
- case CPU_R3081:
- case CPU_R3081E:
- case CPU_R6000:
- case CPU_R6000A:
- case CPU_R8000: /* Not shure about that one, play safe */
- cyclecounter_available = 0;
- break;
- case CPU_R4000PC:
- case CPU_R4000SC:
- case CPU_R4000MC:
- case CPU_R4200:
- case CPU_R4400PC:
- case CPU_R4400SC:
- case CPU_R4400MC:
- case CPU_R4600:
- case CPU_R10000:
- case CPU_R4300:
- case CPU_R4650:
- case CPU_R4700:
- case CPU_R5000:
- case CPU_R5000A:
- case CPU_R4640:
- case CPU_NEVADA:
- cyclecounter_available = 1;
- break;
- }
-}
-
struct irqaction irq0 = {timer_interrupt, SA_INTERRUPT, 0,
"timer", NULL, NULL};
@@ -513,8 +473,6 @@
xtime.tv_sec = mktime(year, mon, day, hour, min, sec);
xtime.tv_usec = 0;
write_unlock_irq(&xtime_lock);
-
- init_cycle_counter();
if (cyclecounter_available) {
write_32bit_cp0_register(CP0_COUNT, 0);
--
Florian Lohoff flo@rfc822.org +49-5201-669912
Why is it called "common sense" when nobody seems to have any?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] DEC init_cycle_counter
2000-12-02 12:27 [PATCH] DEC init_cycle_counter Florian Lohoff
@ 2000-12-02 13:02 ` Juan J. Quintela
2000-12-02 13:14 ` Florian Lohoff
2000-12-02 13:26 ` Kevin D. Kissell
2000-12-02 13:27 ` Ralf Baechle
2 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Juan J. Quintela @ 2000-12-02 13:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Florian Lohoff; +Cc: linux-mips
>>>>> "florian" == Florian Lohoff <flo@rfc822.org> writes:
florian> Comments ?
[snip]
florian> -char cyclecounter_available;
florian> -
[snip]
florian> if (cyclecounter_available) {
florian> write_32bit_cp0_register(CP0_COUNT, 0);
You delete the definition of cyclecounter_available and you mantain
one of its uses ..... that is a no-no, I will bet that with that
patch, this don't compile (and less it works .....).
Later, Juan.
--
In theory, practice and theory are the same, but in practice they
are different -- Larry McVoy
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] DEC init_cycle_counter
2000-12-02 13:02 ` Juan J. Quintela
@ 2000-12-02 13:14 ` Florian Lohoff
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Florian Lohoff @ 2000-12-02 13:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Juan J. Quintela; +Cc: linux-mips
On Sat, Dec 02, 2000 at 02:02:51PM +0100, Juan J. Quintela wrote:
> You delete the definition of cyclecounter_available and you mantain
> one of its uses ..... that is a no-no, I will bet that with that
> patch, this don't compile (and less it works .....).
>
It actually compiles but i cant test due to the TLB and swapping stuff.
This whole cyle_counter stuff has moved to the generic mips time.c
in arch/mips/kernel/time.c and seemed to be a complete code duplication.
Flo
--
Florian Lohoff flo@rfc822.org +49-5201-669912
Why is it called "common sense" when nobody seems to have any?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] DEC init_cycle_counter
2000-12-02 12:27 [PATCH] DEC init_cycle_counter Florian Lohoff
2000-12-02 13:02 ` Juan J. Quintela
@ 2000-12-02 13:26 ` Kevin D. Kissell
2000-12-02 13:26 ` Kevin D. Kissell
2000-12-02 13:27 ` Ralf Baechle
2 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Kevin D. Kissell @ 2000-12-02 13:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Florian Lohoff, linux-mips
Only that if you adopted the CPU probe and configuration
scheme that we've been promulgating at MIPS, it would
already have been taken care of in kernel/cpu_probe.c, and
could be tested as (mips_cpu.options & MIPS_CPU_COUNTER).
I believe I even checked in the headers and C file in the 2.2
repository, though I don't think I "wired it up" to replace the old
assembler spaghetti.
Kevin K.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Florian Lohoff" <flo@rfc822.org>
To: <linux-mips@oss.sgi.com>
Sent: Saturday, December 02, 2000 1:27 PM
Subject: [PATCH] DEC init_cycle_counter
>
> Comments ?
>
> Index: time.c
> ===================================================================
> RCS file: /cvs/linux/arch/mips/dec/time.c,v
> retrieving revision 1.11
> diff -u -r1.11 arch/mips/dec/time.c
> --- arch/mips/dec/time.c 2000/11/23 02:00:49 1.11
> +++ arch/mips/dec/time.c 2000/12/02 12:20:09
> @@ -423,46 +423,6 @@
> timer_interrupt(irq, dev_id, regs);
> }
>
> -char cyclecounter_available;
> -
> -static inline void init_cycle_counter(void)
> -{
> - switch (mips_cputype) {
> - case CPU_UNKNOWN:
> - case CPU_R2000:
> - case CPU_R3000:
> - case CPU_R3000A:
> - case CPU_R3041:
> - case CPU_R3051:
> - case CPU_R3052:
> - case CPU_R3081:
> - case CPU_R3081E:
> - case CPU_R6000:
> - case CPU_R6000A:
> - case CPU_R8000: /* Not shure about that one, play safe */
> - cyclecounter_available = 0;
> - break;
> - case CPU_R4000PC:
> - case CPU_R4000SC:
> - case CPU_R4000MC:
> - case CPU_R4200:
> - case CPU_R4400PC:
> - case CPU_R4400SC:
> - case CPU_R4400MC:
> - case CPU_R4600:
> - case CPU_R10000:
> - case CPU_R4300:
> - case CPU_R4650:
> - case CPU_R4700:
> - case CPU_R5000:
> - case CPU_R5000A:
> - case CPU_R4640:
> - case CPU_NEVADA:
> - cyclecounter_available = 1;
> - break;
> - }
> -}
> -
> struct irqaction irq0 = {timer_interrupt, SA_INTERRUPT, 0,
> "timer", NULL, NULL};
>
> @@ -513,8 +473,6 @@
> xtime.tv_sec = mktime(year, mon, day, hour, min, sec);
> xtime.tv_usec = 0;
> write_unlock_irq(&xtime_lock);
> -
> - init_cycle_counter();
>
> if (cyclecounter_available) {
> write_32bit_cp0_register(CP0_COUNT, 0);
>
>
> --
> Florian Lohoff flo@rfc822.org +49-5201-669912
> Why is it called "common sense" when nobody seems to have any?
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] DEC init_cycle_counter
2000-12-02 13:26 ` Kevin D. Kissell
@ 2000-12-02 13:26 ` Kevin D. Kissell
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Kevin D. Kissell @ 2000-12-02 13:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Florian Lohoff, linux-mips
Only that if you adopted the CPU probe and configuration
scheme that we've been promulgating at MIPS, it would
already have been taken care of in kernel/cpu_probe.c, and
could be tested as (mips_cpu.options & MIPS_CPU_COUNTER).
I believe I even checked in the headers and C file in the 2.2
repository, though I don't think I "wired it up" to replace the old
assembler spaghetti.
Kevin K.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Florian Lohoff" <flo@rfc822.org>
To: <linux-mips@oss.sgi.com>
Sent: Saturday, December 02, 2000 1:27 PM
Subject: [PATCH] DEC init_cycle_counter
>
> Comments ?
>
> Index: time.c
> ===================================================================
> RCS file: /cvs/linux/arch/mips/dec/time.c,v
> retrieving revision 1.11
> diff -u -r1.11 arch/mips/dec/time.c
> --- arch/mips/dec/time.c 2000/11/23 02:00:49 1.11
> +++ arch/mips/dec/time.c 2000/12/02 12:20:09
> @@ -423,46 +423,6 @@
> timer_interrupt(irq, dev_id, regs);
> }
>
> -char cyclecounter_available;
> -
> -static inline void init_cycle_counter(void)
> -{
> - switch (mips_cputype) {
> - case CPU_UNKNOWN:
> - case CPU_R2000:
> - case CPU_R3000:
> - case CPU_R3000A:
> - case CPU_R3041:
> - case CPU_R3051:
> - case CPU_R3052:
> - case CPU_R3081:
> - case CPU_R3081E:
> - case CPU_R6000:
> - case CPU_R6000A:
> - case CPU_R8000: /* Not shure about that one, play safe */
> - cyclecounter_available = 0;
> - break;
> - case CPU_R4000PC:
> - case CPU_R4000SC:
> - case CPU_R4000MC:
> - case CPU_R4200:
> - case CPU_R4400PC:
> - case CPU_R4400SC:
> - case CPU_R4400MC:
> - case CPU_R4600:
> - case CPU_R10000:
> - case CPU_R4300:
> - case CPU_R4650:
> - case CPU_R4700:
> - case CPU_R5000:
> - case CPU_R5000A:
> - case CPU_R4640:
> - case CPU_NEVADA:
> - cyclecounter_available = 1;
> - break;
> - }
> -}
> -
> struct irqaction irq0 = {timer_interrupt, SA_INTERRUPT, 0,
> "timer", NULL, NULL};
>
> @@ -513,8 +473,6 @@
> xtime.tv_sec = mktime(year, mon, day, hour, min, sec);
> xtime.tv_usec = 0;
> write_unlock_irq(&xtime_lock);
> -
> - init_cycle_counter();
>
> if (cyclecounter_available) {
> write_32bit_cp0_register(CP0_COUNT, 0);
>
>
> --
> Florian Lohoff flo@rfc822.org +49-5201-669912
> Why is it called "common sense" when nobody seems to have any?
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] DEC init_cycle_counter
2000-12-02 12:27 [PATCH] DEC init_cycle_counter Florian Lohoff
2000-12-02 13:02 ` Juan J. Quintela
2000-12-02 13:26 ` Kevin D. Kissell
@ 2000-12-02 13:27 ` Ralf Baechle
2 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Ralf Baechle @ 2000-12-02 13:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Florian Lohoff; +Cc: linux-mips
On Sat, Dec 02, 2000 at 01:27:48PM +0100, Florian Lohoff wrote:
> Comments ?
I got a better an more complete from MIPS in the patch queue.
Ralf
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2000-12-02 13:28 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2000-12-02 12:27 [PATCH] DEC init_cycle_counter Florian Lohoff
2000-12-02 13:02 ` Juan J. Quintela
2000-12-02 13:14 ` Florian Lohoff
2000-12-02 13:26 ` Kevin D. Kissell
2000-12-02 13:26 ` Kevin D. Kissell
2000-12-02 13:27 ` Ralf Baechle
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox