On 01/20/2015 02:25 AM, Daniel Thompson wrote: > On 13/01/15 10:26, Daniel Thompson wrote: >> Hi Thomas, Hi Jason: >> Patches 1 to 3 are for you (and should be separable from the rest >> of the series). The patches haven't changes since the last time >> I posted them. The changes in v14 tidy up the later part of the >> patch set in order to share more code between x86 and arm. > No review comments! Have I finally got this right? > > If so it possible and/or sensible to get patches 1-3 in a tree that > feeds linux-next. I'd really like the gic changes to meet the various > ARM build and boot bots.
With this patchset, is it possible to call sched_clock() from within NMI context? I ask because the generic sched_clock() code is not NMI safe today. We were planning on making it NMI safe by doing something similar to what was done for ktime_get_mono_fast_ns() but we haven't gotten around to it. Mostly because no architecture that uses generic sched_clock() has support for NMIs right now. -- Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
