On 04/05/2017 04:54, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
>>>
>>> + /*
>>> + * if more than period clocks were passed, i.e, the
>>> timer interrupt
>>> + * has been lost, we should catch up the time.
>>> + */
>>> + if (s->lost_tick_policy == LOST_TICK_POLICY_SLEW &&
>>> + (lost_clo / period)) {
>>> + int lost_interrupt = lost_clock / period;
>>> +
>>> + s->irq_coalesced += lost_interrupt;
>>> + lost_clock -= lost_interrupt * period;
>>> + if (lost_interrupt) {
>>> + DPRINTF_C("cmos: compensate %d interrupts,
>>> coalesced irqs "
>>> + "increased to %d\n", lost_interrupt,
>>> + s->irq_coalesced);
>>> + rtc_coalesced_timer_update(s);
>>> + }
>>
>> I think you should merge these two patches, since both of them
>> essentially update the number of coalesced ticks and then split it
>> between s->irq_coalesced and lost_clock.
>
> I thought these two patches fix two different issues, one for clock
> lost for coalesced-irq and another for period reconfiguration. Your
> suggestion sounds reasonable indeed, will merged them in the next
> version. :)
Yunfang's patch in turn has two parts, one that is only for SLEW and one
that is not. You can keep the first separate, and merge the second with
yours.
Paolo
