From: ye janboe <janboe.ye@gmail.com>
To: john stultz <johnstul@us.ibm.com>
Cc: zippel@linux-m68k.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, mingo@elte.hu,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] update clocksource raw_time in timekeeping_suspend
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2009 16:07:10 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <af3ea28a0909100107q328d1288x8d677d4d5f79f728@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1252537622.9883.24.camel@localhost.localdomain>
hi, John
Thanks for your comments.
After sent this patch, I realize that this patch exposes the hardware
detail ugly in common code.
In embed system, user space apps need to have a method to get the
right time which will not be impacted by NTP and suspend.
Yes, you are right. I want to add sleep_length to the raw time and
user space apps could get the right time after suspend.
Is this right semantics of CLOCK_MONOTONIC_RAW?
Janboe
2009/9/10 john stultz <johnstul@us.ibm.com>:
> On Wed, 2009-09-09 at 15:35 +0800, ye janboe wrote:
>> after resume from suspend, raw_time is not updated in
>> timekeeping_suspend. CLOCK_MONOTONIC_RAW could not get the real hw
>> time.
>> This patch fix this issue.
>
> Hmm.. I'll admit suspend probably was less considered with
> CLOCK_MONOTONIC_RAW, so the semantics aren't well established.
>
> However, I do think we want CLOCK_MONOTONIC_RAW to at-least closely map
> to CLOCK_MONOTONIC (but *not* be NTP adjusted). I think that is what
> folks would most likely expect.
>
> However, that isn't what this patch seems to do.
>
> Over suspend, I believe all hardware counters reset, so this patch would
> seem to try to subtract the value back.
>
> This sort of makes sense for something like the TSC, which never wraps,
> so the raw_time would be set back to a tranlation of the actual TSC
> counter, but for other clocksources like the ACPI PM, it would only
> subtract at most 5 seconds. So this leaks hardware specific detail in an
> ugly way.
>
> Instead I suspect the most intuitive change would be to add in the
> sleep_length to the raw time. This keeps CLOCK_MONOTONIC_RAW behaving
> similarly to CLOCK_MONOTONIC, which I believe makes it more useful for
> folks using CLOCK_MONOTONIC_RAW for things like tuning time
> synchronization.
>
> But let me know more why you chose this implementation and maybe that
> will show some better insight in to how you expect it to behave.
>
> thanks
> -john
>
>
>
>> Signed-off-by: janboe <janboe.ye@gmail.com>
>> ---
>> kernel/time/timekeeping.c | 6 ++++++
>> 1 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/kernel/time/timekeeping.c b/kernel/time/timekeeping.c
>> index e8c77d9..8420b85 100644
>> --- a/kernel/time/timekeeping.c
>> +++ b/kernel/time/timekeeping.c
>> @@ -331,6 +331,8 @@ static unsigned long timekeeping_suspend_time;
>> static int timekeeping_resume(struct sys_device *dev)
>> {
>> unsigned long flags;
>> + s64 nsec;
>> + cycle_t last_cycle, cycle_delta;
>> unsigned long now = read_persistent_clock();
>>
>> clocksource_resume();
>> @@ -346,8 +348,12 @@ static int timekeeping_resume(struct sys_device *dev)
>> }
>> update_xtime_cache(0);
>> /* re-base the last cycle value */
>> + last_cycle = clock->cycle_last;
>> clock->cycle_last = 0;
>> clock->cycle_last = clocksource_read(clock);
>> + cycle_delta = clock->cycle_last - last_cycle;
>> + nsec = cyc2ns(clock, cycle_delta);
>> + timespec_add_ns(&clock->raw_time, nsec);
>> clock->error = 0;
>> timekeeping_suspended = 0;
>> write_sequnlock_irqrestore(&xtime_lock, flags);
>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-09-10 8:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-09-09 7:35 ye janboe
2009-09-09 14:25 ` Yong Zhang
2009-09-09 22:32 ` ye janboe
2009-09-09 23:07 ` john stultz
2009-09-10 8:07 ` ye janboe [this message]
2009-09-10 9:31 ` Yong Zhang
2009-09-10 22:15 ` john stultz
2009-09-11 3:35 ` ye janboe
2009-09-11 18:09 ` john stultz
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=af3ea28a0909100107q328d1288x8d677d4d5f79f728@mail.gmail.com \
--to=janboe.ye@gmail.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=johnstul@us.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=zippel@linux-m68k.org \
/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®