[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <9068678.D8T0aRhgnK@wuerfel>
Date: Mon, 05 Oct 2015 13:03:52 +0200
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To: Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>
Cc: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, balbi@...com,
Alexandre Courbot <gnurou@...il.com>,
Stephen Warren <swarren@...dotorg.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>,
linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org, tglx@...utronix.de,
Linux OMAP Mailing List <linux-omap@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH 00/11] arm: omap: counter32k rework
On Monday 05 October 2015 03:55:55 Tony Lindgren wrote:
> * Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org> [151001 15:16]:
> > On 09/30/2015 04:49 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > >On Wednesday 30 September 2015 16:42:21 Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > >>
> > >>TEGRA folks: the tegra_read_persistent_clock() implementation apparently
> > >>predates the Tegra RTC driver and I wonder if they actually do the
> > >>right thing in combination. Could it be that the wall time forwards
> > >>twice as fast as it should during resume when the RTC driver is loaded?
> > >>Could it be that we can simply remove tegra_read_persistent_clock()
> > >>and the register_persistent_clock() infrastructure?
> > >>
> > >
> > >I found the 'sleeptime_injected' variable now, which takes care of
> > >forwarding the clock by the correct amount.
> > >
> > >I also found the CLOCK_SOURCE_SUSPEND_NONSTOP flag next to it, which
> > >should let us use the counter32k driver to provide the correct
> > >time during suspend without the omap_read_persistent_clock() function.
> > >We should be able to just delete that code.
> > >
> > >If we decide to also delete the tegra_read_persistent_clock()
> > >function, we can remove the registration too.
> >
> >
> > +1
>
> We could maybe have read_persistent_clock() just check for the
> CLOCK_SOURCE_SUSPEND_NONSTOP flag?
timekeeping_resume() already ignores the persistent clock values if
the clocksource has this set. Do you mean we should additionally
not call the read_persistent_clock() function at all to safe a
few cycles reading that value?
How expensive is the function?
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists