[lkml]   [2013]   [Oct]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH] sched_clock: fix postinit no sched_clock function check
On 10/02/13 10:27, Santosh Shilimkar wrote:
> On Wednesday 02 October 2013 01:22 PM, Stephen Boyd wrote:
>> On 10/02/13 10:14, Santosh Shilimkar wrote:
>>> On Wednesday 02 October 2013 01:09 PM, Will Deacon wrote:
>>>> On Wed, Oct 02, 2013 at 05:55:28PM +0100, Santosh Shilimkar wrote:
>>>>> The sched_clock code uses 2 levels of function pointers, sched_clock_func()
>>>>> and read_sched_clock() but the no sched_clock check in postinit() just
>>>>> checks read_sched_clock().
>>>>> This leads to kernel falling back to jiffy based sched clock even in
>>>>> presence of sched_clock_func() which is not desirable.
>>>>> Fix the postinit() check to avoid the issue. Probably the issue is hidden
>>>>> so far on most of the arm SOCs because of already existing sched_clock
>>>>> registrations apart from arch_timer sched_clock. One can reproduce the
>>>>> issue by just have arch_timer as sched_clock
>>>> Isn't this just an issue with the arch timer driver not calling
>>>> setup_sched_clock? Instead, we munge around with sched_clock_func directly,
>>>> which doesn't appear to be the way anybody else deals with this.
>>> I thought about that option as well but was not sure since even in that case
>>> the check is not complete. We just ensure that function is popullated.
>> Yes, nothing is actually broken because sched_clock_func() won't try to
>> use the jiffy based read_sched_clock() function. I'm not sure we
>> actually need this patch besides to remove a useless timer that updates
>> the jiffy epoch. Can we wait until my 64-bit sched_clock patch series
>> lands in 3.13? It looks like I still need an ack from Will or Catalin on
>> the architected timer patch before the clocksource folks pick it up.
> Really... I have not created patch out of fun.
> Its broken on my keystone machine at least where the sched_clock is
> falling back on jiffy based sched_clock even in presence of arch_timer
> sched_clock.

How is that possible? sched_clock_func is only assigned by
arch/arm/kernel/arch_timer.c when the architected timer is detected and
sched_clock() in kernel/time/sched_clock.c calls that function pointer
unconditionally. The only way I see this happening is if the architected
timer rate is zero. I agree we will get two lines in the dmesg about
sched_clock and its not very clear which one is being used.

Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
hosted by The Linux Foundation

 \ /
  Last update: 2013-10-02 20:01    [W:0.084 / U:11.152 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site