Re: [RFC PATCH 06/13] m68k: Drop ARCH_USES_GETTIMEOFFSET

2018-11-14 Thread Michael Schmitz
Hi Finn Am 15.11.2018 um 12:54 schrieb Michael Schmitz: That one does appear to work - different versions of ARAnyM, and different userland versions though. I'll test that again with the setup that saw c606b5cf902 fail. Still fails on that emulator / userland. Must be a quirk of ARAnyM 1.0.2

Re: [RFC PATCH 06/13] m68k: Drop ARCH_USES_GETTIMEOFFSET

2018-11-14 Thread Finn Thain
On Thu, 15 Nov 2018, Michael Schmitz wrote: > Hi Finn, > > On 14/11/18 3:58 PM, Michael Schmitz wrote: > > Hi Finn, > > > > Am 14.11.2018 um 14:08 schrieb Michael Schmitz: > > > > Can you also test tree fbf8405cd982 please? > > > > > > > My tests were on c606b5cf902 in case it wasn't clear. I'v

Re: [RFC PATCH 01/13] arm: Fix mutual exclusion in arch_gettimeoffset

2018-11-14 Thread Finn Thain
On Wed, 14 Nov 2018, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > However, I now see (having searched mailing lists) what you are trying > to do - you have _not_ copied me or the mailing lists I'm on with your > cover message, so I'm *totally* lacking in the context of your patch > series, particularly wh

Re: [RFC PATCH 01/13] arm: Fix mutual exclusion in arch_gettimeoffset

2018-11-14 Thread Michael Schmitz
On 14/11/18 8:58 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: Are you saying that's not possible on arm, because the current timer rundown counter can't be read while the timer is running? If I were to run a second timer at higher rate for clocksource, but keeping the 10 ms timer as clock event (coul

Re: [RFC PATCH 06/13] m68k: Drop ARCH_USES_GETTIMEOFFSET

2018-11-14 Thread Michael Schmitz
Hi Finn, On 14/11/18 3:58 PM, Michael Schmitz wrote: Hi Finn, Am 14.11.2018 um 14:08 schrieb Michael Schmitz: Can you also test tree fbf8405cd982 please? My tests were on c606b5cf902 in case it wasn't clear. I've now seen fbf8405cd982, one moment please ... That one does appear to work - di

Re: [RFC PATCH 01/13] arm: Fix mutual exclusion in arch_gettimeoffset

2018-11-14 Thread Russell King - ARM Linux
On Wed, Nov 14, 2018 at 03:58:36PM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > Hi Russell, > > On Wed, Nov 14, 2018 at 3:16 PM Russell King - ARM Linux > wrote: > > On Wed, Nov 14, 2018 at 02:17:09PM +1100, Finn Thain wrote: > > > So, even assuming that you're right about the limitations of single-timer >

Re: [RFC PATCH 01/13] arm: Fix mutual exclusion in arch_gettimeoffset

2018-11-14 Thread Geert Uytterhoeven
Hi Russell, On Wed, Nov 14, 2018 at 3:16 PM Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > On Wed, Nov 14, 2018 at 02:17:09PM +1100, Finn Thain wrote: > > So, even assuming that you're right about the limitations of single-timer > > platforms in general, removal of arch_gettimeoffset wouldn't require the > >

Re: [RFC PATCH 01/13] arm: Fix mutual exclusion in arch_gettimeoffset

2018-11-14 Thread Russell King - ARM Linux
On Wed, Nov 14, 2018 at 02:17:09PM +1100, Finn Thain wrote: > On Tue, 13 Nov 2018, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > > > > > A clocksource provides a cycle counter that monotonically changes and > > does not wrap between clockevent events. > > > > A clock event is responsible for providing even

Re: [RFC PATCH 01/13] arm: Fix mutual exclusion in arch_gettimeoffset

2018-11-14 Thread Russell King - ARM Linux
On Mon, Nov 12, 2018 at 03:12:39PM +1100, Finn Thain wrote: > Implementations of arch_gettimeoffset are generally not re-entrant > and assume that interrupts have been disabled. Unfortunately this > pre-condition got broken in v2.6.32. To me, it looks way worse than what you think. The original c

Re: m68k using deprecated internal APIs?

2018-11-14 Thread Linus Walleij
On Sat, Nov 10, 2018 at 10:47 PM Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Fri, Nov 9, 2018 at 12:42 AM Finn Thain wrote: > > On Sun, 28 Oct 2018, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > > > > > The example I gave was GENERIC_CLOCKEVENTS on m68, which is > > > > > supported on most but not all machines there. > > > > > > >