[PATCH] clocksource/drivers/exynos_mct: Use percpu interrupts only on ARM64
William McVicker
willmcvicker at google.com
Wed Sep 24 10:17:39 PDT 2025
Hi Daniel,
On 09/24/2025, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
>
> Hi Marek,
>
> On 19/09/2025 23:31, Marek Szyprowski wrote:
> > On 27.08.2025 13:58, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> > > On 27/08/2025 12:26, Marek Szyprowski wrote:
> > > > For some unknown reasons forcing percpu interrupts for local timers
> > > > breaks CPU hotplug for 'little' cores on legacy ARM 32bit Exynos based
> > > > machines (for example Exynos5422-based Odroid-XU3/XU4 boards). Use percpu
> > > > flag only when driver is compiled for newer ARM64 architecture.
> > > >
> > > > Fixes: f3cec54ee3bf ("clocksource/drivers/exynos_mct: Set local timer interrupts as percpu")
> > >
> > > I am pretty sure the patch above was not tested on arm32, thus this
> > > workaround seems reasonable.
> > >
> > > Reviewed-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski at linaro.org>
> >
> > Daniel, any chance to get this merged?
>
> The patch does not apply. However it is not your fault but a glitch in the
> previous pull request and the regression found in the Exynos MCT.
>
> Apparently, Thomas had to drop the entire pull request while I thought he
> dropped only Will's changes.
>
> A pull request with the previous changes for v6.17-rc1 and with the new
> changes for v6.18-rc1 is about to be emitted but without the Exynos MCT
> changes for the modularization. That means your change does not apply
> correctly anymore on the current changes.
Is there somewhere I can check to see which changes will be re-sent? I don't
see them in the timers/drivers/next branch. Will it be patches 2-4 plus the
fixes for the section mismatch and this new IRQ fix? Once that's all sorted
out, I'll base the new modularization patches on top of that.
Thanks,
Will
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list