Will, On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 2:57 AM, Will Deacon <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 08:50:16PM +0100, Doug Anderson wrote: >> On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 11:46 AM, Will Deacon <[email protected]> wrote: >> > If `where we're at' is trying to boot an ARMv7 product, then you can boot >> > in >> > secure svc and lose virtualisation support. Looking forward to ARMv8, this >> > isn't going to work, so I'd encourage you to start thinking about getting >> > a working bootloader as a requirement. >> >> Yup, definitely on the same page now. With everyone working on this >> I'd imagine that there will be some nice standards worked out by the >> time real ARMv8 is ready to ship? >> >> ...so would you say that you're in support of landing the patch to >> allow physical counters? I know Olof has Acked the patch above, but >> it's nice if there's general agreement that it's OK. > > I'm in favour of fixing the regression, yes. What I didn't understand from > the patch is where arch_timer_use_virtual is set to false for your machine, > as we need to be careful not to regress arm64 (the vdso uses the virtual > counter there).
See <https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/4889311/> -Doug -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
