linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v7 8/8] clocksource: simplify ACPI code in arm_arch

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: <alpine.DEB.2.11.1508252113590.15006@nanos>
Date:	Tue, 25 Aug 2015 21:17:37 +0200 (CEST)
From:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:	Fu Wei <fu.wei@...aro.org>
cc:	Suravee Suthikulpanit <Suravee.Suthikulpanit@....com>,
	Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@...aro.org>,
	Linaro ACPI Mailman List <linaro-acpi@...ts.linaro.org>,
	linux-watchdog@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
	Wei Fu <tekkamanninja@...il.com>,
	G Gregory <graeme.gregory@...aro.org>,
	Al Stone <al.stone@...aro.org>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
	Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,
	Vipul Gandhi <vgandhi@...eaurora.org>,
	Wim Van Sebroeck <wim@...ana.be>,
	Jon Masters <jcm@...hat.com>, Leo Duran <leo.duran@....com>,
	Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
	Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
	Rafael Wysocki <rjw@...ysocki.net>, dyoung@...hat.com,
	panand@...hat.com, Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 8/8] clocksource: simplify ACPI code in
 arm_arch_timer.c

On Wed, 26 Aug 2015, Fu Wei wrote:
> >>  /* Initialize per-processor generic timer */
> >> -static int __init arch_timer_acpi_init(struct acpi_table_header *table)
> >> +void __init arch_timer_acpi_init(void)
> >>  {
> >
> > And how is that supposed to work when we have next generation CPUs
> > which implement a different timer? You break multisystem kernels that
> > way.
> 
> yes, you are right, If there is a  next generation CPUs  which
> implement a different timer, (maybe) this driver can not work.
> we may need a new timer driver.
> 
> But,
> (1) for now,  aarch64  core always has the arch timer(this timer is
> part of aarch64 architecture).
> and the existing code make  ARM64 kernel "select ARM_ARCH_TIMER "
> (2) GTDT is designed for generic timer, so in this call "
> arch_timer_acpi_init"  we  parse the gtdt info.
> (3) once we have a ARM64 CPUs which implement a different timer, we
> may need to select a right timer in the config stage.
> and this timer may not be described in GTDT.  So we can implement
> another arch_timer_acpi_init by that time in new timer driver..
> if the new time still uses GTDT(or new version GTDT), we may need to
> update gtdt.c for new timer by that time.

That's simply wrong. You want to build kernels which run on both cpus
and the selection of the timer happens at runtime depending on the
ACPI info. We do the same thing with device tree.
 
> but before we really have this new timer, I think this code is OK to use.

I don't think so, but I leave this decision to the ARM64 maintainers.

Thanks,

	tglx
--
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/