Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] clocksource/drivers/timer-ti-dm: Prepare to handle dra7 timer wrap issue

From: Tony Lindgren <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2021 18:33:40 +0200

Hi,

* Daniel Lezcano <[email-masked]> [210322 15:56]:
> On 04/03/2021 08:37, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> > There is a timer wrap issue on dra7 for the ARM architected timer.
> > In a typical clock configuration the timer fails to wrap after 388 days.
> > 
> > To work around the issue, we need to use timer-ti-dm timers instead.
> > 
> > Let's prepare for adding support for percpu timers by adding a common
> > dmtimer_clkevt_init_common() and call it from dmtimer_clockevent_init().
> > This patch makes no intentional functional changes.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Tony Lindgren <[email-masked]>
> > ---
> 
> [ ... ]
> 
> > @@ -575,33 +574,60 @@ static int __init dmtimer_clockevent_init(struct device_node *np)
> >  	 */
> >  	writel_relaxed(OMAP_TIMER_CTRL_POSTED, t->base + t->ifctrl);
> >  
> > +	if (dev->cpumask == cpu_possible_mask)
> > +		irqflags = IRQF_TIMER;
> > +	else
> > +		irqflags = IRQF_TIMER | IRQF_NOBALANCING;
> 
> Can you explain the reasoning behind the test above ?

In the per cpu case we assign one dmtimer per cpu, and we want the
interrupt handling on the assigned CPU. In the per cpu case we have
the cpu specified with dev->cpumask unlike for the normal clockevent
case.

In the per cpu dmtimer case the interrupt line is not wired per cpu
though, so I don't think we want to add IRQF_PERCPU here.

Or do you have some better suggestion for the flags to use here? :)

Regards,

Tony

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
[email-masked]
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel