[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.21.1806251701410.1821@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2018 17:04:22 +0200 (CEST)
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: Mukesh Ojha <mojha@...eaurora.org>
cc: john.stultz@...aro.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
neeraju@...eaurora.org, gkohli@...eaurora.org,
cpandya@...eaurora.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] time: Fix sleeptime injection for non-stop clocksource
& persistent clock
On Mon, 25 Jun 2018, Mukesh Ojha wrote:
> On 6/23/2018 2:57 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > @@ -1671,7 +1685,6 @@ void timekeeping_resume(void)
> > struct timespec64 ts_new, ts_delta;
> > u64 cycle_now;
> > - sleeptime_injected = false;
> > read_persistent_clock64(&ts_new);
> > clockevents_resume();
> > @@ -1743,6 +1756,8 @@ int timekeeping_suspend(void)
> > if (timekeeping_suspend_time.tv_sec ||
> > timekeeping_suspend_time.tv_nsec)
> > persistent_clock_exists = true;
> > + sleeptime_injected = false;
>
> I did not get the exact valid point of moving it from `timekeeping_suspend` to
> `timekeeping_resume`.
It's the other way round. I move it from resume to suspend. Simply because
it should only be set to 'false' when suspend is reached. It would work the
other way round as well, but I felt it's inconsistent.
Thanks,
tglx
Powered by blists - more mailing lists