Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
From:   Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc:     bigeasy@linutronix.de, mark.rutland@arm.com, maz@kernel.org,
        catalin.marinas@arm.com, will@kernel.org, chenhuacai@kernel.org,
        kernel@xen0n.name, hca@linux.ibm.com, gor@linux.ibm.com,
        agordeev@linux.ibm.com, borntraeger@linux.ibm.com,
        svens@linux.ibm.com, pbonzini@redhat.com, wanpengli@tencent.com,
        vkuznets@redhat.com, tglx@linutronix.de, mingo@redhat.com,
        bp@alien8.de, dave.hansen@linux.intel.com, x86@kernel.org,
        hpa@zytor.com, jgross@suse.com, boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com,
        daniel.lezcano@linaro.org, kys@microsoft.com,
        haiyangz@microsoft.com, wei.liu@kernel.org, decui@microsoft.com,
        rafael@kernel.org, longman@redhat.com, boqun.feng@gmail.com,
        pmladek@suse.com, senozhatsky@chromium.org, rostedt@goodmis.org,
        john.ogness@linutronix.de, juri.lelli@redhat.com,
        vincent.guittot@linaro.org, dietmar.eggemann@arm.com,
        bsegall@google.com, mgorman@suse.de, bristot@redhat.com,
        jstultz@google.com, sboyd@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        loongarch@lists.linux.dev, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org,
        kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-hyperv@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-pm@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 04/13] arm64/arch_timer: Provide noinstr
 sched_clock_read() functions
In-Reply-To: <20230602115451.GG620383@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
References: <20230519102058.581557770@infradead.org>
 <20230519102715.435618812@infradead.org>
 <xhsmho7m9ptrk.mognet@vschneid.remote.csb>
 <20230602115451.GG620383@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date:   Wed, 07 Jun 2023 09:58:22 +0100
Message-ID: <xhsmhsfb3odht.mognet@vschneid.remote.csb>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Precedence: bulk

On 02/06/23 13:54, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, May 24, 2023 at 05:40:47PM +0100, Valentin Schneider wrote:
>>
>> So this bit sent me on a little spelunking session :-)
>>
>> From a control flow perspective the initialization isn't required, but then
>> I looked into the comment and found it comes from the
>> arch_timer_read_counter() definition... Which itself doesn't get used by
>> sched_clock() until the sched_clock_register() below!
>>
>> So AFAICT that comment was true as of
>>
>>   220069945b29 ("clocksource: arch_timer: Add support for memory mapped timers")
>>
>> but not after a commit that came 2 months later:
>>
>>   65cd4f6c99c1 ("arch_timer: Move to generic sched_clock framework")
>>
>> which IIUC made arm/arm64 follow the default approach of using the
>> jiffy-based sched_clock() before probing DT/ACPI and registering a "proper"
>> sched_clock.
>>
>> All of that to say: the comment about arch_timer_read_counter() vs early
>> sched_clock() doesn't apply anymore, but I think we need to keep its
>> initalization around for stuff like get_cycles(). This initialization here
>> should be OK to put to the bin, though.
>
> Something like the below folded in then?
>

Much better, thank you!