linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 21/29] nios2: Time keeping

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]

Date:	Tue, 28 Oct 2014 14:39:46 +0100
From:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To:	Ley Foon Tan <lftan@...era.com>
Cc:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Linux-Arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-doc@...r.kernel.org" <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
	Chung-Lin Tang <cltang@...esourcery.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 21/29] nios2: Time keeping

On Tuesday 28 October 2014 18:43:04 Ley Foon Tan wrote:
> On Sel, 2014-10-28 at 10:23 +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > On Tuesday 28 October 2014 10:46:29 Ley Foon Tan wrote:
> > > On Sun, Oct 26, 2014 at 5:10 AM, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> wrote:
> > > > On Fri, 24 Oct 2014, Ley Foon Tan wrote:
> > > >> +#ifndef _ASM_NIOS2_TIMEX_H
> > > >> +#define _ASM_NIOS2_TIMEX_H
> > > >> +
> > > >> +typedef unsigned long cycles_t;
> > > >> +
> > > >> +extern cycles_t get_cycles(void);
> > > >> +
> > > >> +#define ARCH_HAS_READ_CURRENT_TIMER
> > > >
> > > > Why does NIOS need that? Does it have a hardware implementation
> > > > dependent clock frequency which needs to be calibrated at boot time?
> > > This is suggestion from Arnd to use read_current_timer instead of using
> > > expensive delay loop calibration during boot.
> > 
> > My mistake, sorry. I think the right way is to define
> > calibrate_delay_is_known() rather than read_current_timer(), I was
> > getting confused by the ARM implementation that does both.
> Hi Arnd,
> No problem, I can change that. But, seem that we don't need to have
> calibrate_delay_is_known() as well. We can just set "lpj_fine" variable,
> arm64 uses this.

Right, that works too.

> BTW, do you have further comment for other patches in this series? Only
> few minor updates since v4 patches and would like to get it into the
> v3.18 merge window if possible. What's your opinion? 

The 3.18 merge window is closed, we already have 3.18-rc2 now.

I have taken another look over the series now, I only had
a few additional comments. Please fix those along with the comments
you got from other reviewers and then ask Stephen Rothwell to
include your tree in linux-next (if it isn't already).

When 3.18 is released, you can then send a pull request to Linus.

	Arnd
--
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/