linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] clocksource/drivers/exynos_mct: Prioritise Arm arch timer on arm64

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 22 Jun 2021 07:21:46 +0200
From:   Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>
To:     Chanwoo Choi <cw00.choi@...sung.com>, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...onical.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] clocksource/drivers/exynos_mct: Prioritise Arm arch
 timer on arm64

On 22/06/2021 04:40, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
> On 6/21/21 7:18 PM, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
>> On 21/06/2021 12:10, Will Deacon wrote:
>>
>> [ ... ]
>>
>>>>> exynos4_mct_frc_start() is called unconditionally from probe via
>>>>> exynos4_clocksource_init() so as long as the mct probes first, then the
>>>>> arch timer should work, no? The rating shouldn't affect that.
>>>>
>>>> How do you ensure the exynos mct is probed before the arch timer ?
>>>>
>>>> The Makefile provides the right order, but the dependency is implicit.
>>>
>>> Currently, I think it's done by the order of the CPU hotplug notifiers (
>>> see the hunk of 6282edb72bed which touches cpuhotplug.h).
>>
>> Ah, right. Indeed whatever the DT order, the cpuhotplug order solves the
>> dependency.
>>
>> Chanwoo, are fine with this change ?
> 
> OK about the order.
> 
> Actually, I have not fully tested the arch timer on Exynos5433 64bit
> because of the dependency between arch timer and MCT as we knew.
> 
> If the Krzysztof and Marek have no any objection,
> I have no any objection anymore. Thanks.
> 

Shall I consider it as an Acked-by ?

-- 
<http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs

Follow Linaro:  <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro> Facebook |
<http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg> Twitter |
<http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog/> Blog