[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200904162530.GA32095@lst.de>
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 2020 18:25:30 +0200
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To: Anup Patel <anup.patel@....com>
Cc: Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>,
Palmer Dabbelt <palmerdabbelt@...gle.com>,
Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>,
Albert Ou <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>,
Atish Patra <atish.patra@....com>,
Alistair Francis <Alistair.Francis@....com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
Anup Patel <anup@...infault.org>,
linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] RISC-V: Allow drivers to provide custom read_cycles64
for M-mode kernel
On Fri, Sep 04, 2020 at 09:51:21PM +0530, Anup Patel wrote:
> The TIME CSR is usually not present on most RISC-V systems so the
> M-mode firmware will emulate the TIME CSR for the S-mode (MMU) kernel
> whereas the M-mode (NoMMU) kernel will have to use MMIO clocksource.
>
> Currently, the get_cycles() implementation in asm/timex.h does not
> consider the above fact so we provide alternate implementation of
> the get_cycles() for the M-mode (NoMMU) kernel which expects drivers
> to provide custom MMIO based read_cycles64() method.
Please just go back to the previous working version without all the
crazy indirections.
The whole timer and irq code has been turned into a giant maze of
indirections lately.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists