[GIT PULL] clocksource/clockevents fixes for 3.13

[GIT PULL] clocksource/clockevents fixes for 3.13

[Daniel Lezcano]

Hi Thomas,

here are the fixes for 3.13 based on timers/urgent

  * Axel Lin removed the bcm_timer_ids which are no longer used due to 
the conversion to clksrc-of and added a missing dependency on 
CLKSRC_MMIO in the Kconfig for the time-efm32.

  * Dinh Nguyen fixed read_sched_clock to return the right value for the 
dw_apb_timer.

  * Ezequiel Garcia registered the sched clock after the counter, thus 
preventing time jump in the traces for the armada-370-xp.

  * Marc Zyngier stopped the timer before enabling the irq in order to 
prevent it to be fired before the clockevent is registered for the sunxi.

  * Thierry Reding removed a of_node_put in clksrc-of because the 
reference is not held.

Thanks

   -- Daniel


The following changes since commit 0e576acbc1d9600cf2d9b4a141a2554639959d50:

   nohz: Fix another inconsistency between CONFIG_NO_HZ=n and nohz=off 
(2013-11-29 12:23:03 +0100)

are available in the git repository at:

   git://git.linaro.org/people/dlezcano/linux.git clockevents/fixes

for you to fetch changes up to 75bf1f2333a0df1471b06ab4be220d2a7f877284:

   clocksource: sunxi: Stop timer from ticking before enabling 
interrupts (2013-12-05 17:30:27 +0100)

----------------------------------------------------------------
Axel Lin (2):
       clocksource: time-efm32: Select CLKSRC_MMIO
       clocksource: bcm_kona_timer: Remove unused bcm_timer_ids

Dinh Nguyen (2):
       clocksource: dw_apb_timer: Move timer defines to header file.
       clocksource: dw_apb_timer_of: Fix read_sched_clock

Ezequiel Garcia (1):
       clocksource: armada-370-xp: Register sched_clock after the 
counter reset

Marc Zyngier (1):
       clocksource: sunxi: Stop timer from ticking before enabling 
interrupts

Thierry Reding (1):
       clocksource: clksrc-of: Do not drop unheld reference on device node

  drivers/clocksource/Kconfig              |    1 +
  drivers/clocksource/bcm_kona_timer.c     |    6 ------
  drivers/clocksource/clksrc-of.c          |    1 -
  drivers/clocksource/dw_apb_timer.c       |   19 -------------------
  drivers/clocksource/dw_apb_timer_of.c    |    9 +++++----
  drivers/clocksource/sun4i_timer.c        |    3 +++
  drivers/clocksource/time-armada-370-xp.c |   10 +++++-----
  include/linux/dw_apb_timer.h             |   19 +++++++++++++++++++
  8 files changed, 33 insertions(+), 35 deletions(-)



-- 
  <http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs

Follow Linaro:  <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro> Facebook |
<http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg> Twitter |
<http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog/> Blog

Re: [GIT PULL] clocksource/clockevents fixes for 3.13

[Ingo Molnar]

* Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> wrote:

> 
> Hi Thomas,
> 
> here are the fixes for 3.13 based on timers/urgent

Please generally also post the patches to make it easier to review 
them.

>  * Axel Lin removed the bcm_timer_ids which are no longer used due
> to the conversion to clksrc-of and added a missing dependency on
> CLKSRC_MMIO in the Kconfig for the time-efm32.

Is the ID removal a necessary regression fix? If not then it has no 
place in the urgent queue.

Thanks,

	Ingo

Re: [GIT PULL] clocksource/clockevents fixes for 3.13

[Daniel Lezcano]

On 12/10/2013 01:20 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> wrote:
>
>>
>> Hi Thomas,
>>
>> here are the fixes for 3.13 based on timers/urgent
>
> Please generally also post the patches to make it easier to review
> them.

Hi Ingo,

what do you mean by "also post the patches" ? The patches were posted in 
the mailing lists and I picked them up after people reviewed them.

Or shall I give a combined diff when sending the PR ?

>>   * Axel Lin removed the bcm_timer_ids which are no longer used due
>> to the conversion to clksrc-of and added a missing dependency on
>> CLKSRC_MMIO in the Kconfig for the time-efm32.
>
> Is the ID removal a necessary regression fix? If not then it has no
> place in the urgent queue.

No, you are right. It is not a regression fix. I assumed it was an 
acceptable patch for urgent but apparently not. Thanks for clarifying 
this. Let me resend a new PR without this patch.

   -- Daniel


-- 
  <http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs

Follow Linaro:  <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro> Facebook |
<http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg> Twitter |
<http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog/> Blog

Re: [GIT PULL] clocksource/clockevents fixes for 3.13

[Ingo Molnar]

* Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> wrote:

> On 12/10/2013 01:20 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >
> >* Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>Hi Thomas,
> >>
> >>here are the fixes for 3.13 based on timers/urgent
> >
> >Please generally also post the patches to make it easier to review
> >them.
> 
> Hi Ingo,
> 
> what do you mean by "also post the patches" ? The patches were 
> posted in the mailing lists and I picked them up after people 
> reviewed them.

For example I found none of Dinh Nguyen's two patches on lkml.

Even if they were on lkml it's generally good practice to post patches 
for pull requests even if they are mostly resends of existing patches, 
especially for an urgent tree. That makes it easier for people to 
chime in on patches.

> Or shall I give a combined diff when sending the PR ?

Individual patches posted as a threaded reply to the pull request mail 
would be nice - those are easy for other people to ignore, yet they 
are informative to people who are interested in the series.

Thanks,

	Ingo

Re: [GIT PULL] clocksource/clockevents fixes for 3.13

[Daniel Lezcano]

On 12/10/2013 02:36 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> wrote:
>
>> On 12/10/2013 01:20 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>>>
>>> * Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Hi Thomas,
>>>>
>>>> here are the fixes for 3.13 based on timers/urgent
>>>
>>> Please generally also post the patches to make it easier to review
>>> them.
>>
>> Hi Ingo,
>>
>> what do you mean by "also post the patches" ? The patches were
>> posted in the mailing lists and I picked them up after people
>> reviewed them.
>
> For example I found none of Dinh Nguyen's two patches on lkml.
>
> Even if they were on lkml it's generally good practice to post patches
> for pull requests even if they are mostly resends of existing patches,
> especially for an urgent tree. That makes it easier for people to
> chime in on patches.
>
>> Or shall I give a combined diff when sending the PR ?
>
> Individual patches posted as a threaded reply to the pull request mail
> would be nice - those are easy for other people to ignore, yet they
> are informative to people who are interested in the series.

Ah, ok I see. Will do next time.

Thanks !

   -- Daniel


-- 
  <http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs

Follow Linaro:  <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro> Facebook |
<http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg> Twitter |
<http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog/> Blog