On Fri, 29 Oct 2021 at 16:36, Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 29.10.2021 15:15, Sam Protsenko wrote: > > On Fri, 29 Oct 2021 at 14:38, Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> On 28.10.2021 16:35, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > >>> On 28/10/2021 16:22, Sam Protsenko wrote: > >>>> On Tue, 26 Oct 2021 at 17:03, Krzysztof Kozlowski > >>>> <krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >>>>> On 26/10/2021 13:59, Sam Protsenko wrote: > >>>>>> Some ARM64 Exynos SoCs have MCT timer block, e.g. Exynos850 and > >>>>>> Exynos5433. CLKSRC_EXYNOS_MCT option is not visible unless COMPILE_TEST > >>>>>> is enabled. Select CLKSRC_EXYNOS_MCT option for ARM64 ARCH_EXYNOS like > >>>>>> it's done in arch/arm/mach-exynos/Kconfig, to enable MCT timer support > >>>>>> for ARM64 Exynos SoCs. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Sam Protsenko <semen.protsenko@xxxxxxxxxx> > >>>>>> --- > >>>>>> arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms | 1 + > >>>>>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > >>>>>> > >>>>> +CC Marek, Marc, Mark and Chanwoo, > >>>>> Looks like duplicated: > >>>>> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20181018095708.1527-7-m.szyprowski@xxxxxxxxxxx/ > >>>>> > >>>>> The topic stalled and I think this particular patch did not make sense > >>>>> on its own, without rest of changes from Marek. I am not sure, though... > >>>>> > >>>> Krzysztof, Marek, > >>>> > >>>> That series looks nice, I'm quite interested in that being applied. Do > >>>> you think I can do something to help with that (e.g. rebasing, > >>>> re-sending on behalf of Marek, testing on Exynos850, etc)? > >>> I think there were no objections against v4 of this patchset, but > >>> somehow it wasn't applied. > >>> > >>> Marek, > >>> Does it make sense to try respinning your v4? > >> I think I've abandoned it, because I got a final NACK on the arch timer > >> change (support for 'not-fw-configured' timers). Without that the above > >> mentioned changes doesn't make much sense. > >> > >> I know that the Exynos5433 firmware breaks the defined protocol, but on > >> the other hand I can do nothing more than carrying internally those few > >> patches out of tree to keep it fully working with 'mainline'. > >> > >> I've observed the same problem with newer Exynos SoCs, but those so far > >> didn't get mainline support (yet), although there have been some > >> attempts from the community. > >> > > There is no such problem on Exynos850 SoC (which I'm trying to > > upstream right now), the architectured timer seems to be working fine > > there, as is. Or maybe everything is configured properly in > > bootloader, not sure. Also I managed to use MCT as a primary > > clocksource (for sched_clock, etc) by disabling arch timer in > > arch/arm64/kernel/time.c (just for the sake of test), and it works > > fine. So I still would like to have MCT enabled in kernel: this way > > we can at least test the driver, as the clocksource can be changed to > > MCT via sysfs (or by disabling arch timer in time.c). And for that we > > need to at least enable CLKSRC_EXYNOS_MCT in ARCH_EXYNOS. > MCT can be also set as default by changing its rating, like it is done > under #ifdef CONFIG_ARM. > > I guess all your patches (except one you mentioned) from that series > > should be fine to apply. Do you mind if I re-send your patch series > > (minus one patch) on your behalf? That would spare you some boring > > work, and at least minimize your local delta you're carrying. > > Feel free to resend it. > Thanks! This patch of mine should be ignored then, I'll re-submit Marek's patches soon. > Best regards > > -- > Marek Szyprowski, PhD > Samsung R&D Institute Poland >
