[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <xhsmhsfb3odht.mognet@vschneid.remote.csb>
Date: Wed, 07 Jun 2023 09:58:22 +0100
From: Valentin Schneider <vschneid@...hat.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: bigeasy@...utronix.de, mark.rutland@....com, maz@...nel.org,
catalin.marinas@....com, will@...nel.org, chenhuacai@...nel.org,
kernel@...0n.name, hca@...ux.ibm.com, gor@...ux.ibm.com,
agordeev@...ux.ibm.com, borntraeger@...ux.ibm.com,
svens@...ux.ibm.com, pbonzini@...hat.com, wanpengli@...cent.com,
vkuznets@...hat.com, tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com,
bp@...en8.de, dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com, x86@...nel.org,
hpa@...or.com, jgross@...e.com, boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com,
daniel.lezcano@...aro.org, kys@...rosoft.com,
haiyangz@...rosoft.com, wei.liu@...nel.org, decui@...rosoft.com,
rafael@...nel.org, longman@...hat.com, boqun.feng@...il.com,
pmladek@...e.com, senozhatsky@...omium.org, rostedt@...dmis.org,
john.ogness@...utronix.de, juri.lelli@...hat.com,
vincent.guittot@...aro.org, dietmar.eggemann@....com,
bsegall@...gle.com, mgorman@...e.de, bristot@...hat.com,
jstultz@...gle.com, sboyd@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
loongarch@...ts.linux.dev, linux-s390@...r.kernel.org,
kvm@...r.kernel.org, linux-hyperv@...r.kernel.org,
linux-pm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 04/13] arm64/arch_timer: Provide noinstr
sched_clock_read() functions
On 02/06/23 13:54, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, May 24, 2023 at 05:40:47PM +0100, Valentin Schneider wrote:
>>
>> So this bit sent me on a little spelunking session :-)
>>
>> From a control flow perspective the initialization isn't required, but then
>> I looked into the comment and found it comes from the
>> arch_timer_read_counter() definition... Which itself doesn't get used by
>> sched_clock() until the sched_clock_register() below!
>>
>> So AFAICT that comment was true as of
>>
>> 220069945b29 ("clocksource: arch_timer: Add support for memory mapped timers")
>>
>> but not after a commit that came 2 months later:
>>
>> 65cd4f6c99c1 ("arch_timer: Move to generic sched_clock framework")
>>
>> which IIUC made arm/arm64 follow the default approach of using the
>> jiffy-based sched_clock() before probing DT/ACPI and registering a "proper"
>> sched_clock.
>>
>> All of that to say: the comment about arch_timer_read_counter() vs early
>> sched_clock() doesn't apply anymore, but I think we need to keep its
>> initalization around for stuff like get_cycles(). This initialization here
>> should be OK to put to the bin, though.
>
> Something like the below folded in then?
>
Much better, thank you!
Powered by blists - more mailing lists