[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170320140618.GF31213@leverpostej>
Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2017 14:06:18 +0000
From: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
To: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
Scott Wood <oss@...error.net>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@...aro.org>,
Ding Tianhong <dingtianhong@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/17] arm64: arch_timer: Get rid of
erratum_workaround_set_sne
On Mon, Mar 06, 2017 at 11:26:11AM +0000, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> Let's move the handling of workarounds affecting set_next_event
> to the affected function, instead of overwriding the pointers
Nit: overriding
> as an afterthough. Yes, this is an extra indirection on the
> erratum handling path, but the HW is busted anyway.
[...]
> +#define erratum_set_next_event_tval_virt(...) ({BUG_ON(1); 0;})
> +#define erratum_set_next_event_tval_phys(...) ({BUG_ON(1); 0;})
Nit: BUG()
[...]
> {
> + if (needs_unstable_timer_counter_workaround())
> + return erratum_set_next_event_tval_virt(evt, clk);
> +
> set_next_event(ARCH_TIMER_VIRT_ACCESS, evt, clk);
> return 0;
> }
> @@ -487,6 +490,9 @@ static int arch_timer_set_next_event_virt(unsigned long evt,
> static int arch_timer_set_next_event_phys(unsigned long evt,
> struct clock_event_device *clk)
> {
> + if (needs_unstable_timer_counter_workaround())
> + return erratum_set_next_event_tval_phys(evt, clk);
> +
> set_next_event(ARCH_TIMER_PHYS_ACCESS, evt, clk);
> return 0;
> }
I take it that the new conditionals are NOPs in the !erratum case, so
this doesn't adversely affect the usual case.
Thanks,
Mark.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists