Re: [PATCH v3 0/6] clocksource: rework Atmel TCB timer driver

2018-03-29 Thread Alexander Dahl
Hei hei, Am Donnerstag, 29. März 2018, 10:01:26 CEST schrieb Alexander Dahl: > This is the result: > > INTNAME RATE MAX > 17 [vel timer@fffa] 1837 Ints/s (max: 1912) > 26 [ vel eth0] 3 Ints/s (max:11) Above was with v4.16-rc7+

Re: [PATCH v3 0/6] clocksource: rework Atmel TCB timer driver

2018-03-29 Thread Alexandre Belloni
On 29/03/2018 at 14:07:34 +0200, Daniel Lezcano wrote: > On 29/03/2018 13:42, Alexandre Belloni wrote: > > On 29/03/2018 at 13:31:18 +0200, Alexander Dahl wrote: > >> Pretty sure. I rebuilt the whole BSP and added another line to the kernel > >> source to see if the tree I applied the patches to,

Re: [PATCH v3 0/6] clocksource: rework Atmel TCB timer driver

2018-03-29 Thread Daniel Lezcano
On 29/03/2018 13:42, Alexandre Belloni wrote: > On 29/03/2018 at 13:31:18 +0200, Alexander Dahl wrote: >> Pretty sure. I rebuilt the whole BSP and added another line to the kernel >> source to see if the tree I applied the patches to, was actually built: >> >> >> diff --git a/drivers/clocksource/t

Re: [PATCH v3 0/6] clocksource: rework Atmel TCB timer driver

2018-03-29 Thread Alexandre Belloni
On 29/03/2018 at 13:31:18 +0200, Alexander Dahl wrote: > Pretty sure. I rebuilt the whole BSP and added another line to the kernel > source to see if the tree I applied the patches to, was actually built: > > > diff --git a/drivers/clocksource/timer-atmel-tcb.c > b/drivers/clocksource/timer-atm

Re: [PATCH v3 0/6] clocksource: rework Atmel TCB timer driver

2018-03-29 Thread Alexander Dahl
Hello Alexandre, Am Donnerstag, 29. März 2018, 12:45:42 CEST schrieb Alexandre Belloni: > > This is the result: > > > > INTNAME RATE MAX > > > > 17 [vel timer@fffa] 1837 Ints/s (max: 1912) > > 26 [ vel eth0] 3 Ints/s (max:11)

Re: [PATCH v3 0/6] clocksource: rework Atmel TCB timer driver

2018-03-29 Thread Alexandre Belloni
On 29/03/2018 at 10:01:26 +0200, Alexander Dahl wrote: > Hei hei, > > Am Mittwoch, 28. März 2018, 17:50:33 CEST schrieb Alexandre Belloni: > > On 28/03/2018 at 17:31:35 +0200, Alexandre Belloni wrote: > > > > Do you have an explanation of why the rate is much higher ? > > > > > > The core is givi

Re: [PATCH v3 0/6] clocksource: rework Atmel TCB timer driver

2018-03-29 Thread Alexander Dahl
Hei hei, Am Mittwoch, 28. März 2018, 17:50:33 CEST schrieb Alexandre Belloni: > On 28/03/2018 at 17:31:35 +0200, Alexandre Belloni wrote: > > > Do you have an explanation of why the rate is much higher ? > > > > The core is giving deltas of 31 clocks instead of much more than that, I > > guess I

Re: [PATCH v3 0/6] clocksource: rework Atmel TCB timer driver

2018-03-28 Thread Alexandre Belloni
On 28/03/2018 at 17:31:35 +0200, Alexandre Belloni wrote: > > Do you have an explanation of why the rate is much higher ? > > > > The core is giving deltas of 31 clocks instead of much more than that, I > guess I messed up the initialization somewhere. > I did mess up. Alexander, can you test

Re: [PATCH v3 0/6] clocksource: rework Atmel TCB timer driver

2018-03-28 Thread Alexandre Belloni
On 28/03/2018 at 16:36:34 +0200, Daniel Lezcano wrote: > On 28/03/2018 16:16, Alexandre Belloni wrote: > > On 28/03/2018 at 15:03:11 +0200, Daniel Lezcano wrote: > >> On 28/03/2018 12:29, Alexander Dahl wrote: > >>> Hello Daniel, > >>> > >>> Am Dienstag, 27. März 2018, 13:30:22 CEST schrieb Daniel

Re: [PATCH v3 0/6] clocksource: rework Atmel TCB timer driver

2018-03-28 Thread Daniel Lezcano
On 28/03/2018 16:16, Alexandre Belloni wrote: > On 28/03/2018 at 15:03:11 +0200, Daniel Lezcano wrote: >> On 28/03/2018 12:29, Alexander Dahl wrote: >>> Hello Daniel, >>> >>> Am Dienstag, 27. März 2018, 13:30:22 CEST schrieb Daniel Lezcano: Can you can give a rough amount for the irq rate on t

Re: [PATCH v3 0/6] clocksource: rework Atmel TCB timer driver

2018-03-28 Thread Alexandre Belloni
On 28/03/2018 at 15:03:11 +0200, Daniel Lezcano wrote: > On 28/03/2018 12:29, Alexander Dahl wrote: > > Hello Daniel, > > > > Am Dienstag, 27. März 2018, 13:30:22 CEST schrieb Daniel Lezcano: > >> Can you can give a rough amount for the irq rate on the timer ? > > > > I used itop [1] now to get a

Re: [PATCH v3 0/6] clocksource: rework Atmel TCB timer driver

2018-03-28 Thread Daniel Lezcano
On 28/03/2018 12:29, Alexander Dahl wrote: > Hello Daniel, > > Am Dienstag, 27. März 2018, 13:30:22 CEST schrieb Daniel Lezcano: >> Can you can give a rough amount for the irq rate on the timer ? > > I used itop [1] now to get a rough estimate. First with kernel v4.14.29-rt25 > (fully preempt RT

Re: [PATCH v3 0/6] clocksource: rework Atmel TCB timer driver

2018-03-28 Thread Alexander Dahl
Hello Daniel, Am Dienstag, 27. März 2018, 13:30:22 CEST schrieb Daniel Lezcano: > Can you can give a rough amount for the irq rate on the timer ? I used itop [1] now to get a rough estimate. First with kernel v4.14.29-rt25 (fully preempt RT): INTNAME RATE MA

Re: [PATCH v3 0/6] clocksource: rework Atmel TCB timer driver

2018-03-27 Thread Daniel Lezcano
On 27/03/2018 12:41, Alexander Dahl wrote: > Hello Alexandre, > > Am Freitag, 23. Februar 2018, 18:15:52 CEST schrieb Alexandre Belloni: >> - using the PIT doesn't work well with preempt-rt because its interrupt is >>shared (in particular with the UART and their interrupt flags are >>inco

Re: [PATCH v3 0/6] clocksource: rework Atmel TCB timer driver

2018-03-27 Thread Alexander Dahl
Hello Alexandre, Am Freitag, 23. Februar 2018, 18:15:52 CEST schrieb Alexandre Belloni: > - using the PIT doesn't work well with preempt-rt because its interrupt is >shared (in particular with the UART and their interrupt flags are >incompatible) This is actually quite annoying when usin

Re: [PATCH v3 0/6] clocksource: rework Atmel TCB timer driver

2018-03-22 Thread Alexandre Belloni
Hi Daniel, I'd really like to get this in the kernel soon as we have platform that still can't boot with a mainline kernel because they don't have a PIT. On 23/02/2018 at 18:15:52 +0100, Alexandre Belloni wrote: > Hi, > > This series gets back on the TCB drivers rework. It introduces a new drive