RE: [PATCH v2] Added "Preserve Boot Time Support"

2017-05-17 Thread Mirea, Bogdan-Stefan
Hello Sascha, On Wednesday, May 17, 2017 2:30 PM Sascha Hauer wrote: > As John already said, there's the read_boot_clock64() interface which > should be used here. > By using the read_boot_clock64() interface you can make sure that you > only provide the functionality when it's actually supposed

RE: [PATCH v2] Added "Preserve Boot Time Support"

2017-05-16 Thread Mirea, Bogdan-Stefan
Hello, Any input on this topic? Kind Regards, Bogdan On Thursday, May 04, 2017 1:55 PM Bogdan Mirea wrote: > > Hi Oleksij, > > On Thursday, May 04, 2017 12:27 PM, Oleksij Rempel wrote: > > Hi Bogdan, > > > > are there any example what and how bootloader should do to provide > > correct

RE: [PATCH v2] Added "Preserve Boot Time Support"

2017-05-19 Thread Mirea, Bogdan-Stefan
On Wednesday, May 17, 2017 8:52 PM Sascha Hauer wrote: > On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 02:42:24PM +0000, Mirea, Bogdan-Stefan wrote: > > Hello Sascha, > > > > On Wednesday, May 17, 2017 2:30 PM Sascha Hauer wrote: > > > As John already said, there's the read_boot_clock64(

RE: [PATCH v3] Added "Preserve Boot Time Support"

2017-05-23 Thread Mirea, Bogdan-Stefan
On Monday, May 22, 2017 12:36 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Fri, 19 May 2017, Bogdan Mirea wrote: > This adds a arch_timer specific command line option. Why is this > arch_timer > specific? So if any other platform wants to gain this feature then we > end > up copying that mess to every single

RE: [PATCH v3] Added "Preserve Boot Time Support"

2017-05-24 Thread Mirea, Bogdan-Stefan
On Tuesday, May 23, 2017 7:39 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Tue, 23 May 2017, Mirea, Bogdan-Stefan wrote: > > On Monday, May 22, 2017 12:36 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > > On Fri, 19 May 2017, Bogdan Mirea wrote: > > > This adds a arch_timer specif

RE: [PATCH v3] Added "Preserve Boot Time Support"

2017-05-30 Thread Mirea, Bogdan-Stefan
Hello Thomas, On Friday, May 26, 2017 1:05 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Wed, 24 May 2017, Mirea, Bogdan-Stefan wrote: > > I am thinking about using timekeeping_inject_sleeptime64(delta) hook to > > That's not a hook. It's a regular function. Please use proper technical >

RE: [PATCH] Added "Preserve Boot Time Support"

2017-05-03 Thread Mirea, Bogdan-Stefan
Hello John, On Wednesday, August 17, 2016 10:24 PM John Stultz < john.stu...@linaro.org > wrote: > So... we already have the read_boot_clock64() interface which platforms can > define to provide the power-on-to-now delta which the timekeeping logic will > make use of at init to initialize the

RE: [PATCH v2] Added "Preserve Boot Time Support"

2017-05-04 Thread Mirea, Bogdan-Stefan
Hi Oleksij, On Thursday, May 04, 2017 12:27 PM, Oleksij Rempel wrote: > Hi Bogdan, > > are there any example what and how bootloader should do to provide > correct values? I will give you an example with a real behavior on Renesas RCAR Gen3 Salvator-x: We have an ARM64 SOC with the following

RE: [PATCH v2] Added "Preserve Boot Time Support"

2017-05-17 Thread Mirea, Bogdan-Stefan
Hello Sascha, On Wednesday, May 17, 2017 2:30 PM Sascha Hauer wrote: > As John already said, there's the read_boot_clock64() interface which > should be used here. > By using the read_boot_clock64() interface you can make sure that you > only provide the functionality when it's actually supposed

RE: [PATCH v3] Added "Preserve Boot Time Support"

2017-05-30 Thread Mirea, Bogdan-Stefan
Hello Thomas, On Friday, May 26, 2017 1:05 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Wed, 24 May 2017, Mirea, Bogdan-Stefan wrote: > > I am thinking about using timekeeping_inject_sleeptime64(delta) hook to > > That's not a hook. It's a regular function. Please use proper technical >

RE: [PATCH v2] Added "Preserve Boot Time Support"

2017-05-04 Thread Mirea, Bogdan-Stefan
Hi Oleksij, On Thursday, May 04, 2017 12:27 PM, Oleksij Rempel wrote: > Hi Bogdan, > > are there any example what and how bootloader should do to provide > correct values? I will give you an example with a real behavior on Renesas RCAR Gen3 Salvator-x: We have an ARM64 SOC with the following

RE: [PATCH v3] Added "Preserve Boot Time Support"

2017-05-23 Thread Mirea, Bogdan-Stefan
On Monday, May 22, 2017 12:36 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Fri, 19 May 2017, Bogdan Mirea wrote: > This adds a arch_timer specific command line option. Why is this > arch_timer > specific? So if any other platform wants to gain this feature then we > end > up copying that mess to every single

RE: [PATCH v3] Added "Preserve Boot Time Support"

2017-05-24 Thread Mirea, Bogdan-Stefan
On Tuesday, May 23, 2017 7:39 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Tue, 23 May 2017, Mirea, Bogdan-Stefan wrote: > > On Monday, May 22, 2017 12:36 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > > On Fri, 19 May 2017, Bogdan Mirea wrote: > > > This adds a arch_timer specif

RE: [PATCH v2] Added "Preserve Boot Time Support"

2017-05-19 Thread Mirea, Bogdan-Stefan
On Wednesday, May 17, 2017 8:52 PM Sascha Hauer wrote: > On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 02:42:24PM +0000, Mirea, Bogdan-Stefan wrote: > > Hello Sascha, > > > > On Wednesday, May 17, 2017 2:30 PM Sascha Hauer wrote: > > > As John already said, there's the read_boot_clock64(

RE: [PATCH v2] Added "Preserve Boot Time Support"

2017-05-16 Thread Mirea, Bogdan-Stefan
Hello, Any input on this topic? Kind Regards, Bogdan On Thursday, May 04, 2017 1:55 PM Bogdan Mirea wrote: > > Hi Oleksij, > > On Thursday, May 04, 2017 12:27 PM, Oleksij Rempel wrote: > > Hi Bogdan, > > > > are there any example what and how bootloader should do to provide > > correct

RE: [PATCH] Added "Preserve Boot Time Support"

2017-05-03 Thread Mirea, Bogdan-Stefan
Hello John, On Wednesday, August 17, 2016 10:24 PM John Stultz < john.stu...@linaro.org > wrote: > So... we already have the read_boot_clock64() interface which platforms can > define to provide the power-on-to-now delta which the timekeeping logic will > make use of at init to initialize the