> On May 24, 2022, at 7:12 PM, Scott Cheloha <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> In the future, the clock interrupt will need a working timecounter to
> accurately reschedule itself.
>
> Move tc_init(9) up before cpu_startclock().
>
> (I can't test this but it seems correct.)
>
> ok?
Ping.
This is trivial, can someone with powerpc64 hardware confirm this
boots?
> Index: clock.c
> ===================================================================
> RCS file: /cvs/src/sys/arch/powerpc64/powerpc64/clock.c,v
> retrieving revision 1.3
> diff -u -p -r1.3 clock.c
> --- clock.c 23 Feb 2021 04:44:31 -0000 1.3
> +++ clock.c 25 May 2022 00:05:59 -0000
> @@ -57,6 +57,9 @@ tb_get_timecount(struct timecounter *tc)
> void
> cpu_initclocks(void)
> {
> + tb_timecounter.tc_frequency = tb_freq;
> + tc_init(&tb_timecounter);
> +
> tick_increment = tb_freq / hz;
>
> stathz = 100;
> @@ -68,9 +71,6 @@ cpu_initclocks(void)
> evcount_attach(&stat_count, "stat", NULL);
>
> cpu_startclock();
> -
> - tb_timecounter.tc_frequency = tb_freq;
> - tc_init(&tb_timecounter);
> }
>
> void
