[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Sun, 8 Aug 2021 12:01:10 -0700
From: Oliver Upton <oupton@...gle.com>
To: Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>
Cc: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Peter Shier <pshier@...gle.com>,
Raghavendra Rao Ananta <rananta@...gle.com>,
Ricardo Koller <ricarkol@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] clocksource/arm_arch_timer: Fix masking for high freq counters
On Sun, Aug 8, 2021 at 3:40 AM Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> On Sun, 08 Aug 2021 02:14:35 +0100,
> Oliver Upton <oupton@...gle.com> wrote:
>
> > The only other sane idea that I could come up with is providing this
> > information to the kernel through DT, although that would leave ACPI
> > systems behind.
>
> It also has the disadvantage that a large number of DT timer nodes are
> a mess of cargo-culted, copy-pasted idioms, and that adding another
> property would only make it worse.
Agreed, this does seem like the best solution, short of the
architecture actually providing something to determine the counter
width.
On that note, I wonder how (if ever) we will be able to move away from
unnecessarily masking a 64 bit counter, i.e. a v8.6 or above
implementation. With this patch, one such counter would wrap after
36.56 years, short of the 40 year guarantee we have from the
architecture for < v8.6 implementations. Getting it to 64 bits would
squarely make it someone else's problem ~585 years from now :)
--
Thanks,
Oliver
Powered by blists - more mailing lists