From: John Stultz <john.stultz@linaro.org>
To: Feng Tang <feng.tang@intel.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Alessandro Zummo <a.zummo@towertech.it>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, alek.du@intel.com,
jgunthorpe@obsidianresearch.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] timekeeping: Add persistent_clock_exist flag
Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2012 18:00:23 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <50CA8837.5010800@linaro.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20121214013725.GA11276@feng-snb>
On 12/13/2012 05:37 PM, Feng Tang wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 05:20:36PM -0800, John Stultz wrote:
>> On 12/12/2012 06:05 PM, Feng Tang wrote:
>>> In current kernel, there are several places which need to check
>>> whether there is a persistent clock for the platform. Current check
>>> is done by calling the read_persistent_clock() and validating the
>>> return value.
>>>
>>> Add such a flag to make code more readable and call read_persistent_clock()
>>> only once for all the checks.
>> Sorry.. What the actual benefit of this patch set? (Usually with
>> changelogs its better to explain why you're doing something, rather
>> then just what you're doing.)
> The main benefits is not bother to do the rtc_resume and rtc_suspend work
> if persistent clock exists. Current RTC suspend/resume code will do many
> time calculation and compensation work at first, and then call
> timekeeping_inject_sleeptime() which will just return for platform with
> persistent clock, what I did in this patchset is to put the check at
> the start, also I save the persistent_clock_exist flag for all possible
> check after timekeeping_init().
CC'ing Jason as his recent patch is conceptually connected here.
Ok, Feng, so your patch set is a suspend/resume optimization for the
case where the architecture has a read_persistent_clock()
implementation, but the kernel config has also the rtc HCTOSYS_DEVICE
set, right?
So we basically short-cut the rtc's HCTOSYS_DEVICE suspend/resume logic,
likely to speed up suspend/resume.
So per Jason's related patch, he's made the point that the
persistent_clock and RTC class functionality are basically exclusive
(well, in his case, he said this with respect to updating the RTC, not
reading it - I don't mean to put words in his mouth - Please do correct
me here Jason. :). In other words, we probably should avoid
configurations where both the rtc hctosys and persistent_clock
interfaces are both active.
So my thought here is that this same behavioral change could be made via
Kconfig constraints rather then extra run-time conditionals. Basically
we add a HAS_PERSISTENT_CLOCK, that architectures select if they want to
use the read/update_persistent_clock calls. Then we make the HCTOSYS
option be dependent on !HAS_PERSISTENT_CLOCK. This way we avoid having
configs where there are conflicting paths that we chose from.
thanks
-john
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-12-14 2:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-12-13 2:05 [PATCH 1/3] timekeeping: Add persistent_clock_exist flag Feng Tang
2012-12-13 2:05 ` [PATCH 2/3] rtc: Skip the suspend/resume handling if persistent clock exist Feng Tang
2012-12-13 2:05 ` [PATCH 3/3] rtc: Skip setting xtime if persisent " Feng Tang
2012-12-14 1:20 ` [PATCH 1/3] timekeeping: Add persistent_clock_exist flag John Stultz
2012-12-14 1:37 ` Feng Tang
2012-12-14 2:00 ` John Stultz [this message]
2012-12-14 2:15 ` Feng Tang
2012-12-14 2:38 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2012-12-14 3:13 ` Feng Tang
2012-12-14 4:10 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2012-12-14 21:22 ` John Stultz
2012-12-14 21:56 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2012-12-14 23:23 ` John Stultz
2012-12-17 16:14 ` Feng Tang
2012-12-17 18:22 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2012-12-18 2:44 ` Feng Tang
2012-12-14 21:36 ` John Stultz
2012-12-20 7:02 ` Feng Tang
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=50CA8837.5010800@linaro.org \
--to=john.stultz@linaro.org \
--cc=a.zummo@towertech.it \
--cc=alek.du@intel.com \
--cc=feng.tang@intel.com \
--cc=jgunthorpe@obsidianresearch.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).