From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755828Ab3F1Q2z (ORCPT ); Fri, 28 Jun 2013 12:28:55 -0400 Received: from smtp.citrix.com ([66.165.176.89]:22176 "EHLO SMTP.CITRIX.COM" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755825Ab3F1Q2F (ORCPT ); Fri, 28 Jun 2013 12:28:05 -0400 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.87,958,1363132800"; d="scan'208";a="34129022" Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2013 17:27:58 +0100 From: Stefano Stabellini X-X-Sender: sstabellini@kaball.uk.xensource.com To: Catalin Marinas CC: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk , Stefano Stabellini , "xen-devel@lists.xensource.com" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , Marc Zyngier , Will Deacon , Ian Campbell , Russell King - ARM Linux , Olof Johansson , "arnd@arndb.de" Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 0/6] xen/arm/arm64: CONFIG_PARAVIRT and stolen ticks accounting In-Reply-To: <20130628160156.GH1643@arm.com> Message-ID: References: <20130628155840.GA13468@phenom.dumpdata.com> <20130628160156.GH1643@arm.com> User-Agent: Alpine 2.02 (DEB 1266 2009-07-14) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 28 Jun 2013, Catalin Marinas wrote: > On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 04:58:40PM +0100, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 12:19:54PM +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > this patch series introduces stolen ticks accounting for Xen on ARM and > > > ARM64. > > > Stolen ticks are clocksource ticks that have been "stolen" from the cpu, > > > typically because Linux is running in a virtual machine and the vcpu has > > > been descheduled. > > > To account for these ticks we introduce CONFIG_PARAVIRT and pv_time_ops > > > so that we can make use of: > > > > > > kernel/sched/cputime.c:steal_account_process_tick > > > > > > > > > Stefano Stabellini (6): > > > xen: move xen_setup_runstate_info and get_runstate_snapshot to drivers/xen/time.c > > > kernel: missing include in cputime.c > > > arm: introduce CONFIG_PARAVIRT, PARAVIRT_TIME_ACCOUNTING and pv_time_ops > > > arm64: introduce CONFIG_PARAVIRT, PARAVIRT_TIME_ACCOUNTING and pv_time_ops > > > core: remove ifdef CONFIG_PARAVIRT > > > xen/arm: account for stolen ticks > > > > > > arch/arm/Kconfig | 20 ++++++++ > > > arch/arm/include/asm/paravirt.h | 20 ++++++++ > > > arch/arm/kernel/Makefile | 1 + > > > arch/arm/kernel/paravirt.c | 25 ++++++++++ > > > arch/arm/xen/enlighten.c | 21 +++++++++ > > > arch/arm64/Kconfig | 20 ++++++++ > > > arch/arm64/include/asm/paravirt.h | 20 ++++++++ > > > arch/arm64/kernel/Makefile | 1 + > > > arch/arm64/kernel/paravirt.c | 25 ++++++++++ > > > arch/ia64/xen/time.c | 48 +++----------------- > > > arch/x86/xen/time.c | 76 +------------------------------ > > > > This is going to hit some of the patches that David > > has sent to tglx, I think. You might want to try to rebase on top > > of them (tip/time/for-xen, or something like that ) when they > > are ready. > > > > But for the Xen generic maintainer I am OK with these changes > > so you can stick Acked-by on them. > > > > Are you thinking to push them yourself or via the arm64 maintainer? > > Once the core Xen support is pushed via the arm64 tree (queued for > 3.11-rc1), I'm happy for the subsequent Xen patches to go directly > (similarly for KVM). But it's -rc7 now and I'm not taking any more > patches for the upcoming merging window (unless they are fixes). The problem is that I haven't received any comments on the arm32 changes. Until I get a "go ahead" from Russell I don't feel comfortable with sending a pull request to Linus with the third patch of the series in it. As a consequence I think I'll have to skip the next merge window. After that, I might consider making this patch series arm64 only and send it to Linus myself or via Catalin.