On 04/18/2013 07:00 PM, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> On 04/18/13 12:30, Rob Herring wrote:
>> diff --git a/drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c
>> b/drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c
>> index 122ff05..17ed8e4 100644
>> --- a/drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c
>> +++ b/drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c
>> @@ -266,6 +266,15 @@ static struct notifier_block arch_timer_cpu_nb
>> __cpuinitdata = {
>> .notifier_call = arch_timer_cpu_notify,
>> };
>>
>> +static u64 sched_clock_mult __read_mostly;
>> +
>> +unsigned long long notrace arch_timer_sched_clock(void)
>> +{
>> + return arch_timer_read_counter() * sched_clock_mult;
>> +}
>> +unsigned long long sched_clock(void) \
>> + __attribute__((weak, alias("arch_timer_sched_clock")));
>
> I'm still lost, how does this prevent the timer in ARM's 32 bit
> sched_clock code from getting setup in sched_clock_postinit()? That
> print is still there right? Who owns sched_clock() in multi-target builds?
For arm64, it does not define sched_clock, so it will get
arch_timer_sched_clock.
For arm, sched_clock is defined in arch/arm/kernel/sched_clock.c and the
weak alias is not used. The arm sched_clock function just calls a
function pointer which defaults to sched_clock_32 (which is the original
arm sched_clock implementation). If the arch timer is present, then the
function pointer is set to arch_timer_sched_clock and any calls to
setup_sched_clock and the sched_clock_postinit have no effect.
Otherwise, the functionality is basically unchanged for <=32-bit
sched_clock implementations.
> Why can't we play along with the sched_clock code that lives in arm?
> Maybe we should resurrect those clocksource sched_clock patches again.
> Or maybe we should add support for setup_sched_clock_64() in arm's sched
> clock code.
That's what I originally had which Russell objected to. The needs for
the arch timer is a bit different since we don't need to deal with
wrapping. And we need the same boot time offset and suspend handling in
both arm and arm64.
Rob
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
