Hi John, On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 4:48 PM, John Stultz <john.stu...@linaro.org> wrote: > On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 12:20 PM, Joel Fernandes <joe...@google.com> wrote: >> This boot clock can be used as a tracing clock and will account for >> suspend time. >> >> To keep it NMI safe since we're accessing from tracing, we're not using a >> separate timekeeper with updates to monotonic clock and boot offset >> protected with seqlocks. This has the following minor side effects: >> >> (1) Its possible that a timestamp be taken after the boot offset is updated >> but before the timekeeper is updated. If this happens, the new boot offset >> is added to the old timekeeping making the clock appear to update slightly >> earlier: >> CPU 0 CPU 1 >> timekeeping_inject_sleeptime64() >> __timekeeping_inject_sleeptime(tk, delta); >> timestamp(); >> timekeeping_update(tk, TK_CLEAR_NTP...); >> >> (2) On 32-bit systems, the 64-bit boot offset (tk->offs_boot) may be >> partially updated. Since the tk->offs_boot update is a rare event, this >> should be a rare occurrence which postprocessing should be able to handle. >> >> Cc: Steven Rostedt <rost...@goodmis.org> >> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <t...@linutronix.de> >> Cc: John Stultz <john.stu...@linaro.org> >> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mi...@redhat.com> >> Signed-off-by: Joel Fernandes <joe...@google.com> > > Hey Joel, > Hope you had a good new years! I was queuing this up for testing,
Thanks, yes I had a great new years, hope you did too. > and the patch set no longer applies (to v4.10-rc2). Can you respin it > and resend it? Actually these patches are already in 4.10-rc2. Regards, Joel
