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]

Message-ID: <CAFiDJ5-W9HZtzmDza_c8eh6mk-R7jFzYOncgkQF02xDCvgsx4w@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Thu, 30 Oct 2014 17:03:52 +0800
From:	Ley Foon Tan <lftan@...era.com>
To:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.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 Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 11:15 PM, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> wrote:
> On Tue, 28 Oct 2014, 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.
>
> Please do so and resend the result so I can have another look and add
> my reviewed tag then.
Sure, I will send another revision.

Thanks for reviewing.

Regards
Ley Foon
--
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/