linux-mips
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH] Introduce mips_late_time_init

To: Ralf Baechle <ralf@linux-mips.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Introduce mips_late_time_init
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2010 22:21:04 +0100 (CET)
Cc: David Daney <ddaney@caviumnetworks.com>, Anoop P A <anoop.pa@gmail.com>, linux-mips@linux-mips.org, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
In-reply-to: <20101208203704.GB30923@linux-mips.org>
Original-recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org
References: <1291623812.31822.6.camel@paanoop1-desktop> <4CFD2095.9040404@caviumnetworks.com> <20101208203704.GB30923@linux-mips.org>
Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org
User-agent: Alpine 2.00 (LFD 1167 2008-08-23)
On Wed, 8 Dec 2010, Ralf Baechle wrote:
> Running everything from late_time_init() instead allows the use of kmalloc.
> X86 has the same issue with requiring kmalloc in time_init which is why
> they had moved everything to late_time_init.

It's more ioremap, but yeah.
 
> So the real question is, why can't we just move the call of time_init()
> in setup_kernel() to where late_time_init() is getting called from for
> all architectures, does anything rely on it getting called early?

That's a good question and I asked it myself already. I can't see a
real reason why something would need it early. Definitely worth to
try.

Thanks,

        tglx

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>