linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] clocksource: dw_apb_timer

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: <4138087.gESYTxjr8X@wuerfel>
Date:	Mon, 02 Nov 2015 22:49:01 +0100
From:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To:	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Cc:	Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
	Jisheng Zhang <jszhang@...vell.com>, tglx@...utronix.de,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd.bergmann@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] clocksource: dw_apb_timer_of: support timer-based delay

On Monday 02 November 2015 09:48:38 Daniel Lezcano wrote:
> If I follow the logic of arch_arm_timer is better than dw_apb timer.
> 
> 1. The arch_arm_timer is present
> 
>   => dw_apb timer is not used at all
> 
>   CONFIG_ARM_ARCH_TIMER=y
>   # CONFIG_DW_APB_TIMER is not set
> 
> 2. The arch_arm_timer is *not* present
> 
>   => dw_apb_timer is used with delay code
> 
>   # CONFIG_ARM_ARCH_TIMER is not set
>   CONFIG_DW_APB_TIMER=y
> 
> In both cases, DW_APB_TIMER_BASED_DELAY is not needed.
> 

This still has the same problem that running a multi_v7_defconfig
kernel or a binary distro kernel will always enable both. We really
want to have a good run-time decision, not compile-time.

	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/