[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5411D528.4050605@arm.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2014 18:00:24 +0100
From: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>
To: Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>
CC: Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>,
"olof@...om.net" <olof@...om.net>,
Sonny Rao <sonnyrao@...omium.org>,
Catalin Marinas <Catalin.Marinas@....com>,
Mark Rutland <Mark.Rutland@....com>,
Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>,
Sudeep Holla <Sudeep.Holla@....com>,
Christopher Covington <cov@...eaurora.org>,
Lorenzo Pieralisi <Lorenzo.Pieralisi@....com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
Nathan Lynch <Nathan_Lynch@...tor.com>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
"robh+dt@...nel.org" <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Pawel Moll <Pawel.Moll@....com>,
"ijc+devicetree@...lion.org.uk" <ijc+devicetree@...lion.org.uk>,
"galak@...eaurora.org" <galak@...eaurora.org>,
"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] clocksource: arch_timer: Allow the device tree to
specify the physical timer
On 11/09/14 17:47, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 05:16:44PM +0100, Doug Anderson wrote:
>> Some 32-bit (ARMv7) systems are architected like this:
>>
>> * The firmware doesn't know and doesn't care about hypervisor mode and
>> we don't want to add the complexity of hypervisor there.
>>
>> * The firmware isn't involved in SMP bringup or resume.
>>
>> * The ARCH timer come up with an uninitialized offset between the
>> virtual and physical counters. Each core gets a different random
>> offset.
>>
>> On systems like the above, it doesn't make sense to use the virtual
>> counter. There's nobody managing the offset and each time a core goes
>> down and comes back up it will get reinitialized to some other random
>> value.
>
> You probably need to rephrase this slightly, as there *is* still a
> requirement on the hypervisor/firmware (actually, two!). See below.
>
>> Let's add a property to the device tree to say that we shouldn't use
>> the virtual timer. Firmware could potentially remove this property
>> before passing the device tree to the kernel if it really wants the
>> kernel to use a virtual timer.
>>
>> Note that it's been said that ARM64 (ARMv8) systems the firmware and
>> kernel really can't be architected as described above. That means
>> using the physical timer like this really only makes sense for ARMv7
>> systems.
>
> I'd go further: this only makes sense if you're booting in secure SVC
> mode.
If that's the case, what's the problem? Enter monitor mode, set SCR.NS
to one, nuke CNTVOFF, revert, job done.
What am I missing?
M.
--
Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists