linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 23/27] clocksource: sh

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: <CANqRtoROALpUqi8rKWRpQk7LGc0BqU14AKg-2MgYBMNoEFGA4Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Sat, 15 Feb 2014 02:22:00 +0900
From:	Magnus Damm <magnus.damm@...il.com>
To:	Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>
Cc:	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
	Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart+renesas@...asonboard.com>,
	"linux-sh@...r.kernel.org" <linux-sh@...r.kernel.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 23/27] clocksource: sh_cmt: Add DT support

Hi Laurent,

On Sat, Feb 15, 2014 at 1:12 AM, Laurent Pinchart
<laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com> wrote:
> Hi Magnus,
>
> On Saturday 15 February 2014 01:01:30 Magnus Damm wrote:
>> On Sat, Feb 15, 2014 at 12:53 AM, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
>> > On Friday 14 February 2014 10:58:22 Mark Rutland wrote:
>> >> On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 01:00:01AM +0000, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
>> >> > +Channels Optional Properties:
>> >> > +
>> >> > +  - clock-source-rating: rating of the timer as a clock source device.
>> >> > +  - clock-event-rating: rating of the timer as a clock event device.
>> >>
>> >> This feels like a leak of Linux internals. Why do you need this?
>> >
>> > You're right, it is. The clock source and clock event ratings are
>> > currently configured through platform data, I'll need to find a way to
>> > compute them in the driver instead.
>>
>> That would be very good!
>
> Any pointer would be appreciated :-) How did you compute the various ratings
> used in platform data all over the place ?

Historically we used the rating to select between CMT and TMU. For
clock sources I suppose you also have the jiffy rating to consider.
And for the SMP parts we have ARM IP for TWD and arch timers that have
their ratings too. So you need to check all the timers on a particular
system and consider what you want to have operating by default. The
ARM IP timers should be preferred if available. For clock sources the
rule is probably the higher resolution the better.

>> > There's still one piece of Linux-specific data I need though, as I need to
>> > specify for each channel whether to use it as a clock source device, a
>> > clock event device, both of them or none. That's configuration
>> > information that needs to be provided somehow.
>>
>> I think you can decide clock source or clock event assignment based on
>> number of channels available. If you have only a single channel then both
>> clock event and clock source need to be supported. Otherwise use one channel
>> for clock source and the rest for clock events.
>
> That won't match the current situation. Look at CMT0 in r8a7790 for instance.
> There's two hardware channels available, and we only use the first one, for
> clock events only.

You are correct. The reason for that is that the CMT driver today is
optimized for combined clock event and clock source operation.

Historically the hardware it initially was written for (sh-mobile on
the SH arch) only had a single timer channel so combined operation was
required for tickless to work. But since you're asking how to allocate
channels then I propose checking numbers of channels available and go
from there. With that the r8a7790 support can only get better. =)

>> This is probably out of scope for this DT conversion, but it would be neat
>> if you somehow could specify the CPU affinity for a channel to tie a clock
>> event to an individual CPU core. This would make a a per-cpu timer unless
>> I'm mistaken. But that's more of a software policy than anything else.
>
> Yes, that's a configuration that needs to be specified somewhere. I don't know
> where though.

As long as you have per-channel interrupts described in DT you can
probably handle this in a generic way in the driver.

Thanks,

/ magnus
--
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/