Messages in this thread Patch in this message | | | Date | Mon, 14 Jan 2013 11:29:52 +0000 | From | Mark Rutland <> | Subject | Re: [PATCHv2 1/4] clockevents: Add generic timer broadcast receiver |
| |
On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 11:06:31AM +0000, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Wed, 9 Jan 2013, Mark Rutland wrote: > > +#ifdef CONFIG_GENERIC_CLOCKEVENTS_BROADCAST > > +extern int tick_receive_broadcast(void); > > +#else > > +static inline int tick_receive_broadcast(void) > > +{ > > + return 0; > > +} > > What's the inline function for? If an arch does not have broadcasting > support it should not have a receive broadcast function call either.
That was how this was originally structured [1], but Santosh suggested this would break the build for !GENERIC_CLOCKEVENTS_BROADCAST [1]. It means that the arch-specific receive path (i.e. IPI handler) doesn't have to be #ifdef'd, which makes it less ugly.
I'm happy to have it the other way, with #ifdef'd IPI handlers.
> > > +#endif > > + > > #ifdef CONFIG_GENERIC_CLOCKEVENTS > > extern void clockevents_notify(unsigned long reason, void *arg); > > #else > > diff --git a/kernel/time/tick-broadcast.c b/kernel/time/tick-broadcast.c > > index f113755..5079bb7 100644 > > --- a/kernel/time/tick-broadcast.c > > +++ b/kernel/time/tick-broadcast.c > > @@ -125,6 +125,18 @@ int tick_device_uses_broadcast(struct clock_event_device *dev, int cpu) > > return ret; > > } > > > > +int tick_receive_broadcast(void) > > +{ > > + struct tick_device *td = this_cpu_ptr(&tick_cpu_device); > > + struct clock_event_device *evt = td->evtdev; > > + > > + if (!evt) > > + return -ENODEV; > > Is anything going to use the return value?
I'd added this after looking at the x86 lapic timers, where interrupts might remain pending over a kexec, and lapic interrupts come up before timers are registered. The return value is useful for shutting down the timer in that case (see x86's local_apic_timer_interrupt).
If you don't agree I'll remove the return value.
> > Thanks, > > tglx >
Thanks, Mark.
[1] http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2012-December/138486.html
| |