clocksource: arch_timer: Allow the device tree to specify the physical timer

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.

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.

In order for this patch to do anything useful, we also need Sonny's
patch at <https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/4790921/>

Signed-off-by: Doug Anderson <dianders@chromium.org>
Signed-off-by: Sonny Rao <sonnyrao@chromium.org>
---
 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/arch_timer.txt | 6 ++++++
 drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c                 | 3 +++
 2 files changed, 9 insertions(+)

Hi Doug,

On 09/11/2014 11:52 AM, 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.
> 
> 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.
> 
> In order for this patch to do anything useful, we also need Sonny's
> patch at <https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/4790921/>
> 
> Signed-off-by: Doug Anderson <dianders@chromium.org>
> Signed-off-by: Sonny Rao <sonnyrao@chromium.org>
> ---
>  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/arch_timer.txt | 6 ++++++
>  drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c                 | 3 +++
>  2 files changed, 9 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/arch_timer.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/arch_timer.txt
> index 37b2caf..876d32b 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/arch_timer.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/arch_timer.txt
> @@ -22,6 +22,12 @@ to deliver its interrupts via SPIs.
>  - always-on : a boolean property. If present, the timer is powered through an
>    always-on power domain, therefore it never loses context.
>  
> +** Optional properties:
> +
> +- arm,use-physical-timer : Don't ever use the virtual timer, just use the
> +  physical one.  Not supported for ARM64.
> +
> +
>  Example:
>  
>  	timer {
> diff --git a/drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c b/drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c
> index 5163ec1..8ca07a9 100644
> --- a/drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c
> +++ b/drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c
> @@ -649,6 +649,9 @@ static void __init arch_timer_init(struct device_node *np)
>  		arch_timer_ppi[i] = irq_of_parse_and_map(np, i);
>  	arch_timer_detect_rate(NULL, np);
>  
> +	if (of_property_read_bool(np, "arm,use-physical-timer"))
> +		arch_timer_use_virtual = false;
> +
>  	/*
>  	 * If HYP mode is available, we know that the physical timer
>  	 * has been configured to be accessible from PL1. Use it, so
> 

How's the VDSO supposed to deal with this? It currently does:

cycle_now = arch_counter_get_cntvct()

Christopher

Christopher,

On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 8:58 AM, Christopher Covington
<cov@codeaurora.org> wrote:
> Hi Doug,
>
> On 09/11/2014 11:52 AM, 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.
>>
>> 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.
>>
>> In order for this patch to do anything useful, we also need Sonny's
>> patch at <https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/4790921/>
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Doug Anderson <dianders@chromium.org>
>> Signed-off-by: Sonny Rao <sonnyrao@chromium.org>
>> ---
>>  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/arch_timer.txt | 6 ++++++
>>  drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c                 | 3 +++
>>  2 files changed, 9 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/arch_timer.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/arch_timer.txt
>> index 37b2caf..876d32b 100644
>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/arch_timer.txt
>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/arch_timer.txt
>> @@ -22,6 +22,12 @@ to deliver its interrupts via SPIs.
>>  - always-on : a boolean property. If present, the timer is powered through an
>>    always-on power domain, therefore it never loses context.
>>
>> +** Optional properties:
>> +
>> +- arm,use-physical-timer : Don't ever use the virtual timer, just use the
>> +  physical one.  Not supported for ARM64.
>> +
>> +
>>  Example:
>>
>>       timer {
>> diff --git a/drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c b/drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c
>> index 5163ec1..8ca07a9 100644
>> --- a/drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c
>> +++ b/drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c
>> @@ -649,6 +649,9 @@ static void __init arch_timer_init(struct device_node *np)
>>               arch_timer_ppi[i] = irq_of_parse_and_map(np, i);
>>       arch_timer_detect_rate(NULL, np);
>>
>> +     if (of_property_read_bool(np, "arm,use-physical-timer"))
>> +             arch_timer_use_virtual = false;
>> +
>>       /*
>>        * If HYP mode is available, we know that the physical timer
>>        * has been configured to be accessible from PL1. Use it, so
>>
>
> How's the VDSO supposed to deal with this? It currently does:
>
> cycle_now = arch_counter_get_cntvct()

I don't see that line of code anywhere when I do a "git grep" on linux
or linuxnext.  Can you give me a clearer pointer?

Also, I just want to make sure you saw the part of the patch
description that says:
  In order for this patch to do anything useful, we also need Sonny's
  patch at <https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/4790921/>

-Doug
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

On 09/11/2014 10:58 AM, Christopher Covington wrote:
> 
> On 09/11/2014 11:52 AM, Doug Anderson wrote:
>> diff --git a/drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c b/drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c
>> index 5163ec1..8ca07a9 100644
>> --- a/drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c
>> +++ b/drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c
>> @@ -649,6 +649,9 @@ static void __init arch_timer_init(struct device_node *np)
>>  		arch_timer_ppi[i] = irq_of_parse_and_map(np, i);
>>  	arch_timer_detect_rate(NULL, np);
>>  
>> +	if (of_property_read_bool(np, "arm,use-physical-timer"))
>> +		arch_timer_use_virtual = false;
>> +
>>  	/*
>>  	 * If HYP mode is available, we know that the physical timer
>>  	 * has been configured to be accessible from PL1. Use it, so
>>
> 
> How's the VDSO supposed to deal with this? It currently does:
> 
> cycle_now = arch_counter_get_cntvct()

Note the VDSO for 32-bit ARM is still out of tree so there's no mainline
regression in that respect.

I think as long as there's some way for the vdso initialization code to
discover that it can't use the virtual counter, it should be tractable.
 If that involves adding an API to the arch timer code, that can be
added along with the vdso code.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 05:04:11PM +0100, Doug Anderson wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 8:58 AM, Christopher Covington
> <cov@codeaurora.org> wrote:
> > On 09/11/2014 11:52 AM, Doug Anderson wrote:
> >> diff --git a/drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c b/drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c
> >> index 5163ec1..8ca07a9 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c
> >> @@ -649,6 +649,9 @@ static void __init arch_timer_init(struct device_node *np)
> >>               arch_timer_ppi[i] = irq_of_parse_and_map(np, i);
> >>       arch_timer_detect_rate(NULL, np);
> >>
> >> +     if (of_property_read_bool(np, "arm,use-physical-timer"))
> >> +             arch_timer_use_virtual = false;

Can you #ifdef CONFIG_ARM here please?

> >>       /*
> >>        * If HYP mode is available, we know that the physical timer
> >>        * has been configured to be accessible from PL1. Use it, so
> >>
> >
> > How's the VDSO supposed to deal with this? It currently does:
> >
> > cycle_now = arch_counter_get_cntvct()
> 
> I don't see that line of code anywhere when I do a "git grep" on linux
> or linuxnext.  Can you give me a clearer pointer?

It's in the actual vdso code (arch/arm64/kernel/vdso/gettimeofday.S):

	/* Read the virtual counter. */
	isb
	mrs	x15, cntvct_el0

Will
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

On 09/11/2014 12:04 PM, Doug Anderson wrote:
> Christopher,
> 
> On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 8:58 AM, Christopher Covington
> <cov@codeaurora.org> wrote:
>> Hi Doug,
>>
>> On 09/11/2014 11:52 AM, 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.
>>>
>>> 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.
>>>
>>> In order for this patch to do anything useful, we also need Sonny's
>>> patch at <https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/4790921/>
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Doug Anderson <dianders@chromium.org>
>>> Signed-off-by: Sonny Rao <sonnyrao@chromium.org>
>>> ---
>>>  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/arch_timer.txt | 6 ++++++
>>>  drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c                 | 3 +++
>>>  2 files changed, 9 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/arch_timer.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/arch_timer.txt
>>> index 37b2caf..876d32b 100644
>>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/arch_timer.txt
>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/arch_timer.txt
>>> @@ -22,6 +22,12 @@ to deliver its interrupts via SPIs.
>>>  - always-on : a boolean property. If present, the timer is powered through an
>>>    always-on power domain, therefore it never loses context.
>>>
>>> +** Optional properties:
>>> +
>>> +- arm,use-physical-timer : Don't ever use the virtual timer, just use the
>>> +  physical one.  Not supported for ARM64.
>>> +
>>> +
>>>  Example:
>>>
>>>       timer {
>>> diff --git a/drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c b/drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c
>>> index 5163ec1..8ca07a9 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c
>>> @@ -649,6 +649,9 @@ static void __init arch_timer_init(struct device_node *np)
>>>               arch_timer_ppi[i] = irq_of_parse_and_map(np, i);
>>>       arch_timer_detect_rate(NULL, np);
>>>
>>> +     if (of_property_read_bool(np, "arm,use-physical-timer"))
>>> +             arch_timer_use_virtual = false;
>>> +
>>>       /*
>>>        * If HYP mode is available, we know that the physical timer
>>>        * has been configured to be accessible from PL1. Use it, so
>>>
>>
>> How's the VDSO supposed to deal with this? It currently does:
>>
>> cycle_now = arch_counter_get_cntvct()
> 
> I don't see that line of code anywhere when I do a "git grep" on linux
> or linuxnext.  Can you give me a clearer pointer?

As Nathan mentioned, the code on the 32 bit side isn't merged yet.

http://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg356336.html

Christopher