On Sat, 05 Sep 2020 12:01:42 +0100,
Marc Zyngier <maz@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 04 Sep 2020 10:27:42 +0100,
> Jianyong Wu <jianyong.wu@xxxxxxx> wrote:
[...]
> > +{
> > + ktime_t ktime;
> > +
> > + arm_smccc_1_1_invoke(ARM_SMCCC_VENDOR_HYP_KVM_PTP_FUNC_ID,
> > + hvc_res);
> > + if ((long long)(hvc_res->a0) < 0)
> > + return -EOPNOTSUPP;
>
> Really? What if the cycle counter is a full 64 bit value, as it is
> *mandated* on ARMv8.6? It means that the counter is now invalid for
> half the lifetime of the system. Not acceptable either.
Having re-read this, this field doesn't contain the cycle counter, but
the time in ns. So checking for a negative value should actually be
fine for quite a while. My other comments still stand though.
Thanks,
M.
--
Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible.
_______________________________________________
kvmarm mailing list
kvmarm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
