Re: [PATCH v2] clocksource: arch_timer: Allow the device tree to specify the physical timer

From: Marc Zyngier
Date: Thu Sep 11 2014 - 13:00:39 EST


On 11/09/14 17:47, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 05:16:44PM +0100, Doug Anderson wrote:
>> Some 32-bit (ARMv7) systems are architected like this:
>>
>> * The firmware doesn't know and doesn't care about hypervisor mode and
>> we don't want to add the complexity of hypervisor there.
>>
>> * The firmware isn't involved in SMP bringup or resume.
>>
>> * The ARCH timer come up with an uninitialized offset between the
>> virtual and physical counters. Each core gets a different random
>> offset.
>>
>> On systems like the above, it doesn't make sense to use the virtual
>> counter. There's nobody managing the offset and each time a core goes
>> down and comes back up it will get reinitialized to some other random
>> value.
>
> You probably need to rephrase this slightly, as there *is* still a
> requirement on the hypervisor/firmware (actually, two!). See below.
>
>> Let's add a property to the device tree to say that we shouldn't use
>> the virtual timer. Firmware could potentially remove this property
>> before passing the device tree to the kernel if it really wants the
>> kernel to use a virtual timer.
>>
>> Note that it's been said that ARM64 (ARMv8) systems the firmware and
>> kernel really can't be architected as described above. That means
>> using the physical timer like this really only makes sense for ARMv7
>> systems.
>
> I'd go further: this only makes sense if you're booting in secure SVC
> mode.

If that's the case, what's the problem? Enter monitor mode, set SCR.NS
to one, nuke CNTVOFF, revert, job done.

What am I missing?

M.
--
Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/