Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 2 Jan 2013 11:41:48 +0000 | From | Mark Rutland <> | Subject | Re: [RFC PATCH 0/5] clockevents: decouple broadcast mechanism from drivers |
| |
On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 10:08:02AM +0000, Santosh Shilimkar wrote: > Mark, > > On Tuesday 18 December 2012 05:36 PM, Mark Rutland wrote: > > In some SMP systems, cpu-local timers may stop delivering interrupts > > when in low power states, or not all CPUs may have local timers. To > > support these systems we have a mechanism for broadcasting timer ticks > > to other CPUs. This mechanism relies on the struct > > clock_event_device::broadcast function pointer, which is a > > driver-specific mechanism for broadcasting ticks to other CPUs. > > > > As the broadcast mechanism is architecture-specific, placing the > > broadcast function on struct clock_event_device ties each driver to a > > single architecture. Additionally the driver or architecture backend > > must handle the routing of broadcast ticks to the correct > > clock_event_device, leading to duplication of the list of active > > clock_event_devices. > > > > These patches introduce a generic mechanism for handling the receipt of > > timer broadcasts, and an optional architecture-specific broadcast > > function which allows drivers to be decoupled from a particular > > architecture will retaining support for timer tick broadcasts. These > > mechanisms are wired up for the arm port, and have been boot-tested on a > > pandaboard. > > > Apart from the relevant comments given against couple of patches and > Stephen's printk string comment, the series looks pretty good to me. > > I have tested the series with CPUIdle where the broadcast is actually > used actively.
Great!
> So feel free to add, > Reviewed-tested-by: Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@ti.com>
Thanks!
Mark.
| |