[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4d7c1d3d-df0b-df7c-aabd-8ce9fd9dc623@wdc.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2018 19:23:02 -0700
From: Atish Patra <atish.patra@....com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Cc: "palmer@...ive.com" <palmer@...ive.com>,
"linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org>,
"mark.rutland@....com" <mark.rutland@....com>,
"robh@...nel.org" <robh@...nel.org>,
Damien Le Moal <Damien.LeMoal@....com>,
"marc.zyngier@....com" <marc.zyngier@....com>,
"anup@...infault.org" <anup@...infault.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [RFC 2/3] RISC-V:Support per-hart timebase-frequency
On 9/17/18 7:23 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 14, 2018 at 02:54:55PM -0700, Atish Patra wrote:
>> Follow the updated DT specs and read the timebase-frequency
>> from the boot cpu. Keep the old DT reading as well for backward
>> compatibility. This patch is rework of old patch from Palmer.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Atish Patra <atish.patra@....com>
>
> This setup looks a bit odd because it keeps blindly overwriting
> riscv_timebase for every cpu found. Shouldn't we at least check that
> they all match for now as the rest of the port assumes that?
>
It will be only updated for boot cpu as it is done after this check.
if (cpuid != smp_processor_id())
return 0;
Regards,
Atish
Powered by blists - more mailing lists