[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAERHkrttXdZhZHZs+JasZU6a2kEb1vc6KB25+LbpQycenJZpOg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2019 20:59:42 +0800
From: Aubrey Li <aubrey.intel@...il.com>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc: "Li, Aubrey" <aubrey.li@...ux.intel.com>,
"Lendacky, Thomas" <Thomas.Lendacky@....com>,
Daniel Drake <drake@...lessm.com>,
"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
"H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Endless Linux Upstreaming Team <linux@...lessm.com>,
Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.cz>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/apic: Handle missing global clockevent gracefully
On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 8:25 PM Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> wrote:
>
> On Mon, 12 Aug 2019, Li, Aubrey wrote:
> > On 2019/8/9 20:54, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > > + local_irq_disable();
> > > /*
> > > * Setup the APIC counter to maximum. There is no way the lapic
> > > * can underflow in the 100ms detection time frame
> > > */
> > > __setup_APIC_LVTT(0xffffffff, 0, 0);
> > >
> > > - /* Let the interrupts run */
> > > - local_irq_enable();
> > > + /*
> > > + * Methods to terminate the calibration loop:
> > > + * 1) Global clockevent if available (jiffies)
> > > + * 2) TSC if available and frequency is known
> > > + */
> > > + jif_start = READ_ONCE(jiffies);
> > > +
> > > + if (tsc_khz) {
> > > + tsc_start = rdtsc();
> > > + tsc_perj = div_u64((u64)tsc_khz * 1000, HZ);
> > > + }
> > > +
> > > + while (lapic_cal_loops <= LAPIC_CAL_LOOPS) {
> >
> > Is this loop still meaningful, can we just invoke the handler twice
> > before and after the tick?
>
> And that solves what?
>
I meant, can we do this one time?
- lapic_cal_t1 = read APIC counter
- /* Wait for a tick to elapse */
- lapic_cal_t2 = read APIC counter
I'm not clear why we still need this loop, to use the
existing lapic_cal_handler()?
Thanks,
-Aubrey
Powered by blists - more mailing lists