[PATCH v2 2/5] tick/broadcast: Split __tick_broadcast_oneshot_control() into a helper

Will Deacon will at kernel.org
Tue Jun 1 05:13:52 PDT 2021


Hi Thomas,

On Mon, May 31, 2021 at 04:29:20PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Thu, May 27 2021 at 12:56, Will Deacon wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, May 27, 2021 at 07:35:03PM +0800, Xin Hao wrote:
> >> 
> >> 在 2021/5/27 下午4:22, Will Deacon 写道:
> >> > On Thu, May 27, 2021 at 03:23:06PM +0800, Xin Hao wrote:
> >> > >       I  had backport you  tick/broadcast: Prefer per-cpu relatives patches,
> >> > > 
> >> > > but i did not get the true result,  the Wakeup Devices are all null, why?
> >> > Probably because you don't have any suitable per-cpu timers to act as a
> >> > wakeup. Do you have a per-cpu timer registered with CLOCK_EVT_FEAT_PERCPU
> >> 
> >> Yes, you are right, but i want to know why the timer do not support 
> >> CLOCK_EVT_FEAT_PERCPU.
> >
> > I defer to Thomas on this one.
> 
> How should I know what kind of timers this hardware has?

Duh, sorry, I replied to the wrong question. I meant to defer the decision
about whether to print "<NULL>" if the wakeup timer is absent, or whether to
omit the line entirely.

I went with the former in the patches you queued as it's both consistent
with the rest of the code and probably (?) easier to parse.

Will



More information about the linux-arm-kernel mailing list