|To:||"Ralf Baechle" <firstname.lastname@example.org>|
|Subject:||Re: Tickless/dyntick kernel, highres timer and general time crapectomy|
|From:||"Franck Bui-Huu" <email@example.com>|
|Date:||Fri, 8 Jun 2007 10:29:42 +0200|
|Cc:||"Sergei Shtylyov" <firstname.lastname@example.org>, email@example.com|
|Dkim-signature:||a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=TgJUem85BINlU5uy5xmPww98hOQutQo1j7m9EbMrXcSQmKYYf+21xlcLX9hjvFrGHMWacHDcmSJyKhORyDEEXjikgiH7W4rwkfb3JMQA1EwtLVAFzNT8lACQvC9yslZRuvgvF8a93h4IsO6taVZ88zIhUgA4S5KC9lIXYHdMvIU=|
|Domainkey-signature:||a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=ahKRB+Ny55TSoXUqzAs4WEUn8rHQdK0AX671gZ1PMbYN6ZsDDIBMN7q1frFxXOa5GTm41DhmHNT52JYLMKLgnvSzV5hr3JxtoMMLQFmxo29NvZG1iCT+OqSmxZRjt9hXjEYrAecKKSSi8zUZoHijZpTg13QiiA+a8jVK375z0vA=|
|References:||<20070606185450.GA10511@linux-mips.org> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <20070607113032.GA26047@linux-mips.org> <email@example.com> <46680B75.firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com> <20070607154801.GG26047@linux-mips.org>|
Hi Ralf, Ralf Baechle wrote:
On Thu, Jun 07, 2007 at 04:44:11PM +0200, Franck Bui-Huu wrote:No, it doesn't. Even on dyntick kernels, interrupts do happen several times a second. Dynticks have nothing to do with disabling timer interrupts...That's true however if your system has 2 clock devices. One is the r4k-hpt and the other one soemthing else with a higher rating. If you don't stop r4k-hpt interrupts, how does it work ?To some degree this question is hypothetic because generally the cp0 count/compare timer will be the highest rated counter.
Well it increments every other clock. So it's not impossible to have a an other higher rated counter.
But even if so, the basic solution is the same - just ignore the interrupt whenever it happens to be triggered. Or if it isn't shared with an active performance counter interrupt, you could even disable_irq() it.
OK, but the current code doesn't seem to support very well multiple clock event devices. For example the global_cd array is not updated if a new clock event device is registered. Even ll_timer_interrupt() handler should be renamed something like ll_hpt_interrupt() for example. Thanks, -- Franck
|<Prev in Thread]||Current Thread||[Next in Thread>|
|Previous by Date:||Re: [PATCH] cheat for support of more than 256MB memory, Tian|
|Next by Date:||Re: Tickless/dyntick kernel, highres timer and general time crapectomy, Franck Bui-Huu|
|Previous by Thread:||Re: Tickless/dyntick kernel, highres timer and general time crapectomy, Ralf Baechle|
|Next by Thread:||Re: Tickless/dyntick kernel, highres timer and general time crapectomy, Ralf Baechle|
|Indexes:||[Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]|