Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751583AbaK1OoX (ORCPT ); Fri, 28 Nov 2014 09:44:23 -0500 Received: from foss-mx-na.foss.arm.com ([217.140.108.86]:41437 "EHLO foss-mx-na.foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750976AbaK1OoU (ORCPT ); Fri, 28 Nov 2014 09:44:20 -0500 Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2014 14:44:12 +0000 From: Will Deacon To: Mark Rutland Cc: Catalin Marinas , "andrew@lunn.ch" , "heiko@sntech.de" , "gnomes@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk" , Chunyan Zhang , "jslaby@suse.cz" , "jason@lakedaemon.net" , "lanqing.liu@spreadtrum.com" , Pawel Moll , "corbet@lwn.net" , "zhang.lyra@gmail.com" , "zhizhou.zhang@spreadtrum.com" , "geng.ren@spreadtrum.com" , "m-karicheri2@ti.com" , "shawn.guo@freescale.com" , "linux-serial@vger.kernel.org" , "grant.likely@linaro.org" , "orsonzhai@gmail.com" , "florian.vaussard@epfl.ch" , "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" , "artagnon@gmail.com" , "arnd@arndb.de" , "ijc+devicetree@hellion.org.uk" , Marc Zyngier , "galak@codeaurora.org" , "hytszk@gmail.com" , "rrichter@cavium.com" , "broonie@kernel.org" , "wei.qiao@spreadtrum.com" , "sprdlinux@freelists.org" , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , "linux-api@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-doc@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "robh+dt@kernel.org" , "gregkh@linuxfoundation.org" , "broonie@linaro.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/5] arm64: dts: Add support for Spreadtrum SC9836 SoC in dts and Makefile Message-ID: <20141128144412.GG7144@arm.com> References: <1416917818-10506-1-git-send-email-chunyan.zhang@spreadtrum.com> <1416917818-10506-4-git-send-email-chunyan.zhang@spreadtrum.com> <20141127115042.GE857@leverpostej> <20141127121214.GF11511@e104818-lin.cambridge.arm.com> <20141127134309.GJ857@leverpostej> <20141128142913.GB5393@localhost> <20141128143532.GI25883@leverpostej> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20141128143532.GI25883@leverpostej> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 02:35:32PM +0000, Mark Rutland wrote: > On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 02:29:13PM +0000, Catalin Marinas wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 01:43:09PM +0000, Mark Rutland wrote: > > > On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 12:12:15PM +0000, Catalin Marinas wrote: > > > > On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 11:50:43AM +0000, Mark Rutland wrote: > > > > > On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 12:16:56PM +0000, Chunyan Zhang wrote: > > > > > > + > > > > > > + timer { > > > > > > + compatible = "arm,armv8-timer"; > > > > > > + interrupts = <1 13 0xff01>, > > > > > > + <1 14 0xff01>, > > > > > > + <1 11 0xff01>, > > > > > > + <1 10 0xff01>; > > > > > > + clock-frequency = <26000000>; > > > > > > > > > > Please remove the clock-frequency property. Your FW should initialise > > > > > CNTFRQ_EL0 on all CPUs (certainly PSCI 0.2 requires that you do this). > > > > > > > > Since this comes up regularly, I think we need a dev_warn() in the arch > > > > timer driver when CONFIG_ARM64. > > > > > > I'll ack such a patch ;) > > > > How rude would this be? > > > > diff --git a/drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c b/drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c > > index 2133f9d59d06..aaaf3433ccb9 100644 > > --- a/drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c > > +++ b/drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c > > @@ -371,7 +371,8 @@ arch_timer_detect_rate(void __iomem *cntbase, struct device_node *np) > > return; > > > > /* Try to determine the frequency from the device tree or CNTFRQ */ > > - if (of_property_read_u32(np, "clock-frequency", &arch_timer_rate)) { > > + if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ARM64) || > > + of_property_read_u32(np, "clock-frequency", &arch_timer_rate)) { > > if (cntbase) > > arch_timer_rate = readl_relaxed(cntbase + CNTFRQ); > > else > > > > Probably too rude, given it doesn't WARN() the user. We override broken hardware ID registers all the time in device-tree without dumping stack. Why is this any different? > We should be extremely loud if we see the clock-frequency property on an > arm64 system. Whether or not we should ignore the property is another > matter. I don't really see the point in ignoring it. We will see broken hardware [1] and this is just preventing ourselves from working around it. I'd much rather have arch-timers with a "clock-frequence" property than have some other timer instead because the kernel driver is being stubborn. Will [1] A previous version of the Juno firmware, for example. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/