[PATCH v2 1/7] powerpc/85xx: re-enable timebase sync disabled by KEXEC patch

Kumar Gala galak at kernel.crashing.org
Mon Nov 21 03:46:17 EST 2011


On Nov 18, 2011, at 12:01 PM, Scott Wood wrote:

> On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 08:35:02AM -0600, Kumar Gala wrote:
>> 
>> On Nov 16, 2011, at 12:42 PM, Scott Wood wrote:
>> 
>>> On 11/16/2011 03:55 AM, Zhao Chenhui wrote:
>>>> From: Li Yang <leoli at freescale.com>
>>>> 
>>>> The timebase sync is not only necessary when using KEXEC. It should also
>>>> be used by normal boot up and cpu hotplug. Remove the ifdef added by
>>>> the KEXEC patch.
>>> 
>>> Again, no it should not be used by normal boot up (whether KEXEC support
>>> is enabled or not).  We should only do timebase sync when we actually
>>> need to (when we've actually just reset a core), and we should do it the
>>> way U-Boot does rather than with smp-tbsync.c.
>> 
>> 
>> How can we do u-boot bases timebase sync after the system us up and
>> running?  For example would we losing some ticks of time in the case
>> that one core is up and we bring a second core online?
> 
> Yes, we'll lose a small handful of ticks relative to wall clock time --
> but it'll be the same loss on all cores.  It's better than possibly
> having the timebase be imperfectly synchronized, and should complete more
> quickly.

Hmm, I wondering how many ticks it really is.

> This is only during intrusive events such as kexec or deep sleep (we only
> need to reset the core for jog on mpc8536 which has only one core). 
> During deep sleep all cores' timebases will be stopped.  Kexec is
> resetting the kernel; it's not going to care what the old timebase was,
> and should resync from RTC.
> 
> Even if we end up using this for some future power management mode where
> we take down some CPUs to the point their timebase stops, but never take
> down others, the time loss should be negligible (for comparison, what's
> the error tolerance on the crystal frequency?) and acceptable for what is
> still a fairly intrusive and rare event.

I'm also concerned about how this ends up working for p4080 when we have to sync up to 8 cores or more in the future.

- k


More information about the Linuxppc-dev mailing list