[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Y+O56OXIuARBhsg2@google.com>
Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2023 15:04:08 +0000
From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
To: "Michael Kelley (LINUX)" <mikelley@...rosoft.com>
Cc: "lirongqing@...du.com" <lirongqing@...du.com>,
KY Srinivasan <kys@...rosoft.com>,
Haiyang Zhang <haiyangz@...rosoft.com>,
"wei.liu@...nel.org" <wei.liu@...nel.org>,
Dexuan Cui <decui@...rosoft.com>,
"tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>,
"bp@...en8.de" <bp@...en8.de>,
"dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com" <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
"linux-hyperv@...r.kernel.org" <linux-hyperv@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] clockevents/drivers/i8253: Do not zero timer counter in
shutdown
On Wed, Feb 08, 2023, Michael Kelley (LINUX) wrote:
> From: lirongqing@...du.com <lirongqing@...du.com> Sent: Monday, February 6, 2023 5:15 PM
> >
> > Zeroing the counter register in pit_shutdown() isn't actually supposed to
> > stop it from counting, will causes the PIT to start running again,
> > From the spec:
> >
> > The largest possible initial count is 0; this is equivalent to 216 for
> > binary counting and 104 for BCD counting.
> >
> > The Counter does not stop when it reaches zero. In Modes 0, 1, 4, and 5 the
> > Counter "wraps around" to the highest count, either FFFF hex for binary
> > count- ing or 9999 for BCD counting, and continues counting.
> >
> > Mode 0 is typically used for event counting. After the Control Word is
> > written, OUT is initially low, and will remain low until the Counter
> > reaches zero. OUT then goes high and remains high until a new count or a
> > new Mode 0 Control Word is written into the Counter.
> >
> > Hyper-V and KVM follow the spec, the issue that 35b69a42 "(clockevents/drivers/
> > i8253: Add support for PIT shutdown quirk") fixed is in i8253 drivers, not Hyper-v,
> > so delete the zero timer counter register in shutdown, and delete PIT shutdown
> > quirk for Hyper-v
>
> From the standpoint of Hyper-V, I'm good with this change. But there's a
> risk that old hardware might not be compliant with the spec, and needs the
> zero'ing for some reason. The experts in the x86 space will be in the best
> position to assess the risk.
Yep, my feeling exactly. My input is purely from reading those crusty old specs.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists