mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>
To: Samuel Holland <samuel@sholland.org>,
	Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>,
	Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@bootlin.com>,
	Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@csie.org>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-sunxi@googlegroups.com,
	Mark Rutland <Mark.Rutland@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] Allwinner A64 timer workaround
Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2018 10:41:28 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <439ea6ab-9834-64d5-2aff-1a4ac7e3890d@linaro.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bdfb1a31-2c4a-d258-7bf6-aaab8cee4663@sholland.org>

On 03/07/2018 20:42, Samuel Holland wrote:
> On 07/03/18 10:09, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>> On 11/05/18 03:27, Samuel Holland wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> Several people (including me) have experienced extremely large system
>>> clock jumps on their A64-based devices, apparently due to the architectural
>>> timer going backward, which is interpreted by Linux as the timer wrapping
>>> around after 2^56 cycles.
>>>
>>> Investigation led to discovery of some obvious problems with this SoC's 
>>> architectural timer, and this patch series introduces what I believe is
>>> the simplest workaround. More details are in the commit message for patch
>>> 1. Patch 2 simply enables the workaround in the device tree.
>>
>> What's the deal with this series? There was a couple of nits to address, and 
>> I was more or less expecting a v2.
> 
> I got reports that people were still occasionally having clock jumps after
> applying this series, so I wanted to attempt a more complete fix, but I haven't
> had time to do any deeper investigation. I think this series is still beneficial
> even if it's not a complete solution, so I'll come back with another patch on
> top of this if/once I get it fully fixed.
> 
> I'll prepare a v2 with a bounded loop. Presumably, 3 * (max CPU Hz) / (24MHz
> timer) ≈ 150 should be a conservative iteration limit?
> 
> Also, does this make sense to CC to stable?

I understand a partial fix is better than nothing but if you can narrow
down the issue and provide patches to fix it in one shot that would be
awesome.





-- 
 <http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs

Follow Linaro:  <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro> Facebook |
<http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg> Twitter |
<http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog/> Blog


  parent reply	other threads:[~2018-07-04  8:44 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-05-11  2:27 Samuel Holland
2018-05-11  2:27 ` [PATCH 1/2] arm64: arch_timer: Workaround for Allwinner A64 timer instability Samuel Holland
2018-05-11  8:26   ` Maxime Ripard
2018-05-11  8:48   ` Marc Zyngier
2018-05-11 15:08     ` Samuel Holland
2018-05-26 15:15   ` André Przywara
2018-05-11  2:27 ` [PATCH 2/2] arm64: dts: allwinner: a64: Enable A64 timer workaround Samuel Holland
2018-05-11  9:24 ` [PATCH 0/2] Allwinner " Andre Przywara
2018-07-03 15:09 ` Marc Zyngier
2018-07-03 18:42   ` Samuel Holland
2018-07-04  8:16     ` Marc Zyngier
2018-07-04  8:19       ` Chen-Yu Tsai
2018-07-04  8:23       ` Daniel Lezcano
2018-07-04  8:39         ` Marc Zyngier
2018-07-04 10:00           ` Thomas Gleixner
2018-07-04 13:08             ` [linux-sunxi] " Andre Przywara
2018-07-04 14:31               ` Thomas Gleixner
2018-07-04 14:44                 ` Andre Przywara
2018-07-04 15:01                   ` Marc Zyngier
2018-07-04 15:15                     ` Andre Przywara
2018-07-04 15:30                       ` Marc Zyngier
2018-07-04 15:23                     ` Samuel Holland
2018-07-04 15:14                   ` Thomas Gleixner
2018-07-04 15:43                     ` Andre Przywara
2018-07-04 19:49                       ` Thomas Gleixner
2018-07-04  8:41       ` Daniel Lezcano
2018-07-12  2:23         ` Samuel Holland
2018-07-04  9:06       ` Maxime Ripard
2018-07-04  8:41     ` Daniel Lezcano [this message]
2018-07-04 12:52     ` [linux-sunxi] " Andre Przywara

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=439ea6ab-9834-64d5-2aff-1a4ac7e3890d@linaro.org \
    --to=daniel.lezcano@linaro.org \
    --cc=Mark.Rutland@arm.com \
    --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-sunxi@googlegroups.com \
    --cc=marc.zyngier@arm.com \
    --cc=maxime.ripard@bootlin.com \
    --cc=samuel@sholland.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=wens@csie.org \
    --cc=will.deacon@arm.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®