Re: [RFC] ARM: sched_clock: update epoch_cyc on resume

From: Linus Walleij
Date: Mon Jul 23 2012 - 20:15:10 EST

On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 9:27 PM, Colin Cross <ccross@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 11:55 AM, Linus Walleij

> Does the clock you use for sched_clock continue to run in all suspend
> modes? All the SoC's I've used only have a 32kHz clock in the deepest
> suspend mode,

Yes, and yes it is 32kHz.

> which is not ideal for sched_clock.

Not that I know why scheduling with 32kHz is so bad compared to the
default system scheduling granularity which is HZ if you don't have
sched_clock() implemented.

Since this seems to be such an important point, what makes you
want MHz:es for scheduling granularity? To me the biggest impact
is actually the granularity of the timestamps in the printk:s.

(It's not that I doubt your needs, more curiosity.)

> For example, on
> Tegra2 the faster 1MHz clock used for sched_clock resets in the
> deepest suspend state (LP0) but not the shallowest suspend state
> (LP2), and which suspend state the chip hits depends on which hardware
> is active. Opting out of this patch would cause Tegra's clock to
> sometimes run in suspend, and sometimes not, which seems worse for
> debugging than consistently not running in suspend. I'd be surprised
> if a similar situation didn't apply to your platform.

Well being able to switch between different sched_clock() providers
may be the ideal...

>> - If it absolutely needs to be in the core code, also have a bool
>> field indicating whether the clock is going to die during suspend
>> and add new registration functions for setting that sched_clock
>> type, e.g. setup_sched_clock_nonsuspendable()
> Sounds reasonable if some platforms need the extra complexity.

OK agreed.

A connecting theme is that of being avle to flag clock sources as
sched_clock providers. If all clocksources were tagged with
rating, and only clocksources were used for sched_clock(), the
kernel could select the highest-rated clock under all circumstances.

But that's quite intrusive, more of an idea. :-P

Linus Walleij
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at