lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2015]   [May]   [25]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] clockevents: don't suspend/resume if unused
On Mon, 25 May 2015, Sylvain Rochet wrote:
> On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 08:48:06PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > On Fri, 16 Jan 2015, Alexandre Belloni wrote:
> >
> > > There is no point in calling suspend/resume for unused
> > > clockevents as they are already stopped and disabled.
> > >
> > > Furthermore, it can take some time to wait for some IPs to stop counting.
> >
> > While I agree with the patch itself, I really can't understand that
> > last sentence.
> >
> > If stuff is stopped and disabled, what takes time to stop counting?
>
> Atmel PIT is a bit weird, writing to AT91_PIT_MR restarts the timer even
> if you just want to stop it and then the only way to stop the timer is
> to wait for a complete timer cycle.
>
> The problem is not when suspending, restarting the timer just before
> suspending is not such a problem because is will eventually stop at
> some point in the future.
>
> However it can takes a very long time if the system switchs to slow
> clock, therefore when resuming the timer is still running and we have to
> wait for the PIT to stop counting because we re-enabled it for one cycle
> when suspending, which is weird, it adds about ~128ms resumt time for
> Atmel SoC.

That's a reasonable explanation.

While timer IPs seem to be designed by janitors in general, this one
has an extraordinary level of stupidity.

Thanks,

tglx


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2015-05-25 22:41    [W:0.056 / U:0.672 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site