linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v9 4/6] clocksource: stm32: add clocksource support

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: <810270c4-c6b4-ee05-2481-ced52f7d2685@linaro.org>
Date:   Fri, 8 Dec 2017 15:08:09 +0100
From:   Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>
To:     Benjamin Gaignard <benjamin.gaignard@...aro.org>
Cc:     Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
        Maxime Coquelin <mcoquelin.stm32@...il.com>,
        Alexandre Torgue <alexandre.torgue@...com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Benjamin Gaignard <benjamin.gaignard@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 4/6] clocksource: stm32: add clocksource support

On 08/12/2017 15:04, Benjamin Gaignard wrote:
> 2017-12-08 14:46 GMT+01:00 Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>:
>> On 08/12/2017 12:32, Benjamin Gaignard wrote:
>>> The stm32 timer hardware is currently only used as a clock event device,
>>> but it can be utilized as a clocksource as well.
>>>
>>> Implement this by enabling the free running counter in the hardware block
>>> and converting the clock event part from a count down event timer to a
>>> comparator based timer.
>>
>>
>> Split this patch in two:
>>  - periodic support
>>  - clocksource support
> 
> No because the way of implementing periodic support depend of how clocksource
> part is implemented on the hardware.
> I don't want to code functions that I will completely remove just after

Sorry, I don't get it. Can you elaborate please ?


-- 
 <http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs

Follow Linaro:  <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro> Facebook |
<http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg> Twitter |
<http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog/> Blog