On 12/08/2014 04:18 PM, Mark Rutland wrote: > Hi Preeti, > > On Mon, Dec 08, 2014 at 06:55:43AM +0000, Preeti U Murthy wrote: >> Commit 5d1638acb9f6 ('tick: Introduce hrtimer based broadcast') added a >> hrtimer based broadcast mode for those platforms in which local timers stop >> when CPUs enter deep idle states. The commit expected the platforms to >> register for this mode explicitly when they lacked a better external device >> to wake up CPUs in deep idle. Given that more platforms are beginning to use >> this mode, we can avoid the call to set it up on every platform that requires >> it, by registering for the hrtimer based broadcast mode in the core code if >> no better broadcast device is available. >> >> This commit also helps detect cases where the platform fails to register for >> a broadcast device but invokes the help of one when entering deep idle >> states. >> Currently we do not handle this situation at all and call the broadcast clock >> device without checking for its existence. This patch will handle such buggy >> cases properly. >> >> Signed-off-by: Preeti U Murthy <pre...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> > > I've just given this a go on an arm64 platform (Juno) without any > system-wide clock_event_devices registered, and everything works well > with CPUs entering and exiting idle states where the cpu-local timers > lose state. So: > > Tested-by: Mark Rutland <mark.rutl...@arm.com>
Thanks! > > One minor thing I noticed when testing was that > /sys/devices/system/clockevents/broadcast/name contained "(null)", > because we never set the name field on the clock_event_device. It's > always been that way, but now might be a good time to change that to > something like "broadcast_hrtimer". You mean /sys/devices/system/clockevents/broadcast/current_device right? > > [...] > >> diff --git a/include/linux/clockchips.h b/include/linux/clockchips.h >> index 2e4cb67..91754b0 100644 >> --- a/include/linux/clockchips.h >> +++ b/include/linux/clockchips.h >> @@ -187,11 +187,11 @@ extern int tick_receive_broadcast(void); >> #endif >> >> #if defined(CONFIG_GENERIC_CLOCKEVENTS_BROADCAST) && >> defined(CONFIG_TICK_ONESHOT) >> -extern void tick_setup_hrtimer_broadcast(void); >> +extern int __init tick_setup_hrtimer_broadcast(void); >> extern int tick_check_broadcast_expired(void); >> #else >> static inline int tick_check_broadcast_expired(void) { return 0; } >> -static inline void tick_setup_hrtimer_broadcast(void) {}; >> +static inline int __init tick_setup_hrtimer_broadcast(void) { return 0; } >> #endif >> >> #ifdef CONFIG_GENERIC_CLOCKEVENTS >> @@ -207,7 +207,7 @@ static inline void clockevents_resume(void) {} >> >> static inline int clockevents_notify(unsigned long reason, void *arg) { >> return 0; } >> static inline int tick_check_broadcast_expired(void) { return 0; } >> -static inline void tick_setup_hrtimer_broadcast(void) {}; >> +static inline int __init tick_setup_hrtimer_broadcast(void) { return 0; } > > With the initcall moved to the driver we have no external users of > tick_setup_hrtimer_broadcast, so I think we can remove the prototype > entirely from clockchips.h... > >> #endif >> >> diff --git a/kernel/time/tick-broadcast-hrtimer.c >> b/kernel/time/tick-broadcast-hrtimer.c >> index eb682d5..5c35995 100644 >> --- a/kernel/time/tick-broadcast-hrtimer.c >> +++ b/kernel/time/tick-broadcast-hrtimer.c >> @@ -98,9 +98,11 @@ static enum hrtimer_restart bc_handler(struct hrtimer *t) >> return HRTIMER_RESTART; >> } >> >> -void tick_setup_hrtimer_broadcast(void) >> +int __init tick_setup_hrtimer_broadcast(void) > > ...and make it static here. Yep will do. Sorry I overlooked this. > >> { >> hrtimer_init(&bctimer, CLOCK_MONOTONIC, HRTIMER_MODE_ABS); >> bctimer.function = bc_handler; >> clockevents_register_device(&ce_broadcast_hrtimer); >> + return 0; >> } >> +early_initcall(tick_setup_hrtimer_broadcast); > > Otherwise this looks good to me, thanks for putting this together! Thanks a lot for the review! Will send out the patch with the above corrections. Regards Preeti U Murthy > > Mark. > _______________________________________________ > Linuxppc-dev mailing list > Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org > https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev > _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev