On 09.06.22 04:06, Chen, Hongzhan wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Jan Kiszka <[email protected]> 
>> Sent: Wednesday, June 8, 2022 11:21 PM
>> To: Chen, Hongzhan <[email protected]>; [email protected]
>> Subject: Re: [Cobalt Xenoami3.1 PATCH 0/2] notify Xenomai udpated clockfreq.
>>
>> On 02.06.22 14:56, Chen, Hongzhan wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Jan Kiszka <[email protected]> 
>>>> Sent: Thursday, June 2, 2022 5:54 PM
>>>> To: Chen, Hongzhan <[email protected]>; [email protected]
>>>> Subject: Re: [Cobalt Xenoami3.1 PATCH 0/2] notify Xenomai udpated 
>>>> clockfreq.
>>>>
>>>> On 27.05.22 08:22, Hongzhan Chen via Xenomai wrote:
>>>>> When there is refined tsc clock, notify Xenomai to apply it.
>>>>> Linux may schedule a delayed work to refine tsc clock and update
>>>>> tsc_khz which happen after Xenomai finsih init but tsc_scale and
>>>>> tsc_shift still keep the value depending on origianl tsc clock
>>>>> which is outdated. The difference between two clocks may cause
>>>>> timing issue.
>>>>>
>>>>> For example:
>>>>>   [ 0.001731] tsc: Detected 2899.886 MHz TSC
>>>>>   [ 5.588387] tsc: Refined TSC clocksource calibration: 2903.999 MHz
>>>>>   cat /sys/module/xenomai/parameters/clockfreq
>>>>>   2899886000
>>>>>   After patching, we like to use 2903.999 MHz.
>>>>>
>>>>> The patchset includes IPIPE patch and cobalt-patch.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Sounds reasonable, but you could help me with reviewing this by already
>>>> answering:
>>>>
>>>> - How does dovetail (and xenomai 3.2 or evl) address this?
>>>
>>> So far , I have not found similar issue on dovetail-based. Dovetail-based 
>>> would go vdso uniformly so there is
>>> no such issue but IPIPE would have to depend  on tsc_khz value it got at 
>>> first to do translation even after tsc clockfreq is refined and changed.
>>
>> Right, that is reason...
>>
>>>
>>>> - Why is this tagged "3.1" only?
>>>> - Which I-pipe series is this targeting (5.4, or also 4.19)?
>>>
>>> Currently , I just reproduced this issue and verified the patch on 5.4.133 
>>> + xenomai 3.1. But according to [1] reported,
>>> the issue can be found on 4.19 and I think my patch may work but I have not 
>>> verified on 4.19. 
>>>
>>
>> Please check stable/v3.2.x first (or as well) as that is the latest
>> stable with I-pipe still included. Once the fix is merged there, we can
>> pick it for 3.1 and possibly even 3.0 as well.
> 
> The code between 3.2 and 3.1 involving this patchset is quite different now. 
> For 3.2, we already dropped code related to clockfreq parameter
> in 6d2989b6da73ec52fe8c990798be8a637e4db5b9 by Philippe.
> But in my patchset for 3.1, we have to update value of  clockfreq parameter 
> to show correct clock freq after we update to refined clock freq.
> To keep consistency between 3.1 and 3.2 for I-PIPE based code, do we need to 
> revert this part of code related to clockfreq parameter for 3.2?

Do you see the problem of 3.1+ipipe with 3.2 as well? I suspect so, but
please confirm. Then we do need a solution there, too. How is the next
question, I need to dive into that again.

Jan

-- 
Siemens AG, Technology
Competence Center Embedded Linux

Reply via email to