On Wednesday 02 October 2013 01:48 PM, Will Deacon wrote: > On Wed, Oct 02, 2013 at 06:42:40PM +0100, Stephen Boyd wrote: >> On 10/02/13 10:27, Santosh Shilimkar wrote: >>> Really... I have not created patch out of fun. >>> Its broken on my keystone machine at least where the sched_clock is >>> falling back on jiffy based sched_clock even in presence of arch_timer >>> sched_clock. >> >> How is that possible? sched_clock_func is only assigned by >> arch/arm/kernel/arch_timer.c when the architected timer is detected and >> sched_clock() in kernel/time/sched_clock.c calls that function pointer >> unconditionally. The only way I see this happening is if the architected >> timer rate is zero. > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > > *cough* CNTFRQ *cough* > :) CNTFRQ as such is fine. I think the below print mis-lead me mostly.
sched_clock: ARM arch timer >56 bits at 6144kHz, resolution 162ns sched_clock: 32 bits at 100 Hz, resolution 10000000ns, wraps every 4294967286ms So yes, now the subject patch actually just avoids the jiffy sched_clock() registration and nothing else. Even without the patch arch_timer sched_clock will be in use. Regards, Santosh -- 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/
