[RFC PATCH 0/3] clocksource: exynos_mct: allow mct to use 64-bit counter from coprocessor

[Kukjin Kim]

On 07/29/15 08:29, Doug Anderson wrote:
> Hi,
> 
Hi,

> On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 9:20 AM, Alexey Klimov <klimov.linux at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi Doug,
>>
>> On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 6:24 PM, Doug Anderson <dianders at chromium.org> wrote:
>>> Alexey,
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 2:28 PM, Alexey Klimov <klimov.linux at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> year(s) ago it was discovered that MCT timer and ARM architectured
>>>> timer
>>>> are the same hardware with different interface. Here [1].
>>>>
>>>> I followed mail-list discussions about removing MCT and using arch
>>>> timer for Exynos5-based SoCs but things aren't moving at least latest
>>>> upstream kernel on odroid-xu3 will use MCT as default timers.
>>>> Maybe the reason are some power-management related things that very
>>>> specific to Samsung. I don't know.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Idea of this draft patchset comes from Doug patches when he tried to
>>>> optimize read of 64-bit counter located in mmio. [2]
>>>> Why not using cp15 counter instead if possible?
>>>
>>> I hate to burst your bubble here, but...
>>>
>>> ...I think it would be a bad idea to use the cp15 counter on exynos
>>> 5422.  According to Samsung, there are issues where using cp15 could
>>> sometimes return the wrong value, especially if you happen to read it
>>> while on an A7 instead of an A15.  It will tend to work pretty well,
>>> but Samsung claimed that it might not work right on some CPUs or at
>>> some temperatures.
>>
>> I think this is right time when I can say "If only I had known about
>> it before!".
> 
> Yeah, we spent a whole lot of time on this too before giving up after
> we found out it was not possible to use.
> 
> 
>> That's quite interesting especially about temperature issues.
>> Maybe it's worth to insert comments in driver/docs about this.
> 
> Maybe not a bad idea.  Depends if you think someone else will try to
> do this...  ...and if they do, will they check mailing list traffic.
> 
> 
>>> Generally I'd say that if the arch timer works for you: use the arch
>>> timer.  If the arch timer doesn't work for you, use the MCT.
>>>
One more thing, if you change it for your own private platform, it's up
to you but if not, i.e., for mass product, please don't change it.
Because it's not guaranteed even you haven't seen its failure...

>>> -Doug
>>
>> I possess no knowledge if there're any different hw revisions of
>> odroid-xu3 on the field
>> but looks like arch timer works fine for me on odroid-xu3 Exynos5422
>> SoC with upstream kernel.
> 
> Well, it looked like it worked for us too.  In fact, I never saw a
> failure.  All I know is that Samsung said: don't do this, it's not a
> good idea.  The performance gain wasn't enough to go against that...
> That's when I started trying to optimize the MCT a little bit.  ;)
> 
Yeah and it was tough time for me when I discussed about that with
hardware designer at that time ... haha...

Thanks, Doug.

- Kukjin