[lkml]   [2016]   [Oct]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [GIT PULL 1/3] ARM: soc: exynos: Drivers for v4.9
2016. 10. 3. 21:19 Kukjin Kim <> wrote:

+ my samsung email

> 2016. 10. 3. 15:48 Krzysztof Kozlowski <> wrote:
>>>> On Sun, Oct 02, 2016 at 05:25:07PM -0700, Olof Johansson wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 8:53 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski <> wrote:
>>>>>> On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 05:02:40PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>>>>>> On Sunday, September 18, 2016 6:39:46 PM CEST Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>>>>> Samsung drivers/soc update for v4.9:
>>>>>> 1. Allow compile testing of exynos-mct clocksource driver on ARM64.
>>>>>> 2. Document Exynos5433 PMU compatible (already used by clkout driver and more
>>>>>> will be coming soon).
>>>>> Pulled into next/drivers, thanks
>>>>> Just for my understanding: why do we need the exynos-mct driver on ARM64
>>>>> but not the delay-timer portion of it?
>>>> I think we want all of it but Doug's optimization 3252a646aa2c
>>>> ("clocksource: exynos_mct: Only use 32-bits where possible") is not
>>>> ARM64 friendly. One way of dealing with it would be to prepare two
>>>> versions of exynos4_read_current_timer(). One reading only lower 32-bit
>>>> value for ARMv7 and second (slow) reading lower and upper for ARMv8.
>>>>> Is there an advantage in using MCT over the architected timer on these
>>>>> chips? If so, should we also have a way to use it as the delay timer?
>>>> No, there is no real advantage... except that the SoC has some
>>>> interesting "characteristics"... The timers are tightly coupled. Very
>>>> tightly. I spent a lot of time and failed to boot my ARMv8 board without
>>>> some MCT magic.
>>> What kind of magic is that?
>> Most notably: the arch timer starts when MCT forward running counter
>> starts. Without kicking MCT, the arch timer seems to be frozen.
>>> I can understand that needing the MCT for
>>> some system-level timer functionality might be true (wakeups, etc),
>>> but for system timesource avoiding the MMIO timer and using the arch
>>> ones is a substantial performance improvement for gettimeofday() and
>>> friends.
>>> There was extensive discussion last year over using arch timers on
>>> 5420/5422, and it fizzled out with vague comments about something not
>>> working right between A15/A7 on b.L. hardware. I'm presuming whatever
>>> implementation details of that SoC has since been fixed on later chips
>>> (including v8). Any chance you can confirm? It'd be very nice to leave
>>> MCT behind on v8 as a system time source.
>> Unfortunately, I cannot confirm this, at least on Exynos5433 (ARMv8). I
>> played with arch and MCT timers on it and failed to get the
>> arch-timer-only setup working. I did not have access to newer Exynos
>> designs (Exynos 7) so I do not know how it works there.
> Hi guys,
> I know what Olof want to know and actually several days ago someone asked me about that. As you guys talked, a couple of years ago there were some discussions...BTW I need to contact to hardware designer before let you guys know because something needs to be confirmed by them even I know roughly.
> Note I'm in vacation with my family. Will be back on this in several days with exact information.
> BRs,
> Kukjin

 \ /
  Last update: 2016-10-11 02:47    [W:0.101 / U:0.028 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site