[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <c686aae8-3be0-805e-265b-a7f16f2a6c02@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 31 May 2019 15:33:41 +0300
From: Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@...il.com>
To: Peter De Schrijver <pdeschrijver@...dia.com>
Cc: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Joseph Lo <josephl@...dia.com>,
Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>,
Jonathan Hunter <jonathanh@...dia.com>,
linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Nicolas Chauvet <kwizart@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/8] NVIDIA Tegra clocksource driver improvements
31.05.2019 11:26, Peter De Schrijver пишет:
> On Fri, May 24, 2019 at 06:32:45PM +0300, Dmitry Osipenko wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> This series primarily unifies the driver code across all Tegra SoC
>> generations. In a result the clocksources are allocated per-CPU on
>> older Tegra's and have a higher rating than the arch-timer, the newer
>> Tegra210 is getting support for microsecond clocksource and the driver's
>> code is getting much cleaner. Note that arch-timer usage is discouraged on
>> all Tegra's due to the time jitter caused by the CPU frequency scaling.
>
> I think the limitations are more as follows:
>
> Chip timer suffers cpu dvfs jitter can wakeup from cc7
> T20 us-timer No Yes
> T20 twd timer Yes No?
> T30 us-timer No Yes
> T30 twd timer Yes No?
> T114 us-timer No Yes
> T114 arch timer No Yes
> T124 us-timer No Yes
> T124 arch timer No Yes
> T210 us-timer No Yes
> T210 arch timer No No
> T210 clk_m timer No Yes
>
> right?
Doesn't arch timer run off the CPU clock? If yes (that's what I
assumed), then it should be affected by the DVFS. Otherwise I'll lower
the clocksource's rating for T114/124/132.
TWD can't wake CPU from the power-down state, so it's a solid "No" for
TWD in the "can wakeup from cc7" column.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists