linux-kernel - Re: Enable arm_global_timer for Zynq brakes boot

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <5209120D.1010701@linaro.org>
Date:	Mon, 12 Aug 2013 18:49:17 +0200
From:	Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>
To:	Sören Brinkmann <soren.brinkmann@...inx.com>
CC:	Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>, srinivas.kandagatla@...com,
	Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
	Michal Simek <michal.simek@...inx.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Stuart Menefy <stuart.menefy@...com>,
	John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: Enable arm_global_timer for Zynq brakes boot

On 08/12/2013 06:32 PM, Sören Brinkmann wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 09:20:19AM -0700, Stephen Boyd wrote:
>> On 08/12/13 09:03, Sören Brinkmann wrote:
>>> On Fri, Aug 09, 2013 at 10:27:57AM -0700, Stephen Boyd wrote:
>>>> On 08/09, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
>>>>> yes, but at least the broadcast mechanism should send an IPI to cpu0 to
>>>>> wake it up, no ? As Stephen stated this kind of configuration should has
>>>>> never been tested before so the tick broadcast code is not handling this
>>>>> case properly IMHO.
>>>>>
>>>> If you have a per-cpu tick device that isn't suffering from
>>>> FEAT_C3_STOP why wouldn't you use that for the tick versus a
>>>> per-cpu tick device that has FEAT_C3_STOP? It sounds like there
>>>> is a bug in the preference logic or you should boost the rating
>>>> of the arm global timer above the twd. Does this patch help? It
>>>> should make the arm global timer the tick device and whatever the
>>>> cadence timer you have into the broadcast device.
>>> I finally got to test your patch. Unfortunately, it makes the system
>>> hang even earlier:
>>
>> Sorry it had a bug depending on the registration order. Can you try this
>> one (tabs are probably spaces, sorry)? I will go read through this
>> thread to see if we already covered the registration order.
> 
> That did it! Booted straight into the system. 

Good news :)

> The broadcast device is
> the TTC instead of GT, now.
> 
> 	Tick Device: mode:     1
> 	Broadcast device
> 	Clock Event Device: ttc_clockevent
> 	 max_delta_ns:   1207932479
> 	 min_delta_ns:   18432
> 	 mult:           233015
> 	 shift:          32
> 	 mode:           1
> 	 next_event:     9223372036854775807 nsecs
> 	 set_next_event: ttc_set_next_event
> 	 set_mode:       ttc_set_mode
> 	 event_handler:  tick_handle_oneshot_broadcast
> 	 retries:        0
> 	
> 	tick_broadcast_mask: 00000000
> 	tick_broadcast_oneshot_mask: 00000000

At the first glance, the timer broadcast usage is not set, right ? Can
you try with the cpuidle flag even if it is not needed ?

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

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/