From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from co9outboundpool.messaging.microsoft.com (co9ehsobe005.messaging.microsoft.com [207.46.163.28]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "mail.global.frontbridge.com", Issuer "Microsoft Secure Server Authority" (not verified)) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BBD742C011C for ; Wed, 24 Apr 2013 10:04:20 +1000 (EST) Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2013 19:04:06 -0500 From: Scott Wood Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 12/15] powerpc/85xx: add time base sync support for e6500 To: Zhao Chenhui References: <1366368468-29143-1-git-send-email-chenhui.zhao@freescale.com> <1366368468-29143-12-git-send-email-chenhui.zhao@freescale.com> In-Reply-To: <1366368468-29143-12-git-send-email-chenhui.zhao@freescale.com> (from chenhui.zhao@freescale.com on Fri Apr 19 05:47:45 2013) Message-ID: <1366761846.5825.21@snotra> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; delsp=Yes; format=Flowed Cc: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On 04/19/2013 05:47:45 AM, Zhao Chenhui wrote: > From: Chen-Hui Zhao >=20 > For e6500, two threads in one core share one time base. Just need > to do time base sync on first thread of one core, and skip it on > the other thread. >=20 > Signed-off-by: Zhao Chenhui > Signed-off-by: Li Yang > Signed-off-by: Andy Fleming > --- > arch/powerpc/platforms/85xx/smp.c | 52 =20 > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----- > 1 files changed, 44 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) >=20 > diff --git a/arch/powerpc/platforms/85xx/smp.c =20 > b/arch/powerpc/platforms/85xx/smp.c > index 74d8cde..5f3eee3 100644 > --- a/arch/powerpc/platforms/85xx/smp.c > +++ b/arch/powerpc/platforms/85xx/smp.c > @@ -26,6 +26,7 @@ > #include > #include > #include > +#include >=20 > #include > #include > @@ -45,6 +46,7 @@ static u64 timebase; > static int tb_req; > static int tb_valid; > static u32 cur_booting_core; > +static bool rcpmv2; >=20 > #ifdef CONFIG_PPC_E500MC > /* get a physical mask of online cores and booting core */ > @@ -53,26 +55,40 @@ static inline u32 get_phy_cpu_mask(void) > u32 mask; > int cpu; >=20 > - mask =3D 1 << cur_booting_core; > - for_each_online_cpu(cpu) > - mask |=3D 1 << get_hard_smp_processor_id(cpu); > + if (smt_capable()) { > + /* two threads in one core share one time base */ > + mask =3D 1 << cpu_core_index_of_thread(cur_booting_core); > + for_each_online_cpu(cpu) > + mask |=3D 1 << cpu_core_index_of_thread( > + get_hard_smp_processor_id(cpu)); > + } else { > + mask =3D 1 << cur_booting_core; > + for_each_online_cpu(cpu) > + mask |=3D 1 << get_hard_smp_processor_id(cpu); > + } Where is smt_capable defined()? I assume somewhere in the patchset but =20 it's a pain to search 12 patches... Is this really about whether we're SMT-capable or whether we have rcpm =20 v2? -Scott=