All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mark Cave-Ayland <mark.cave-ayland@ilande.co.uk>
To: Finn Thain <fthain@linux-m68k.org>,
	David Gibson <david@gibson.dropbear.id.au>,
	Greg Kurz <groug@kaod.org>
Cc: qemu-ppc@nongnu.org, Laurent Vivier <laurent@vivier.eu>,
	qemu-devel@nongnu.org
Subject: Re: [RFC 09/10] hw/mos6522: Avoid using discrepant QEMU clock values
Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2021 09:44:40 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <157fd841-9a1f-3f8e-1a29-ab79305843c9@ilande.co.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <21f20ab5a100e4947d840080114f3f0511aade86.1629799776.git.fthain@linux-m68k.org>

On 24/08/2021 11:09, Finn Thain wrote:

> mos6522_read() and mos6522_write() may call various functions to determine
> timer irq state, timer counter value and QEMUTimer deadline. All called
> functions must use the same value for the present time.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Finn Thain <fthain@linux-m68k.org>
> ---
>   hw/misc/mos6522.c | 51 +++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------------
>   1 file changed, 27 insertions(+), 24 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/hw/misc/mos6522.c b/hw/misc/mos6522.c
> index 0dd3ccf945..23a440b64f 100644
> --- a/hw/misc/mos6522.c
> +++ b/hw/misc/mos6522.c
> @@ -39,9 +39,9 @@
>   /* XXX: implement all timer modes */
>   
>   static void mos6522_timer1_update(MOS6522State *s, MOS6522Timer *ti,
> -                                  int64_t current_time);
> +                                  int64_t now);
>   static void mos6522_timer2_update(MOS6522State *s, MOS6522Timer *ti,
> -                                  int64_t current_time);
> +                                  int64_t now);
>   
>   static void mos6522_update_irq(MOS6522State *s)
>   {
> @@ -52,12 +52,12 @@ static void mos6522_update_irq(MOS6522State *s)
>       }
>   }
>   
> -static unsigned int get_counter(MOS6522State *s, MOS6522Timer *ti)
> +static unsigned int get_counter(MOS6522State *s, MOS6522Timer *ti, int64_t now)
>   {
>       int64_t d;
>       unsigned int counter;
>   
> -    d = muldiv64(qemu_clock_get_ns(QEMU_CLOCK_VIRTUAL) - ti->load_time,
> +    d = muldiv64(now - ti->load_time,
>                    ti->frequency, NANOSECONDS_PER_SECOND);
>   
>       if (ti->index == 0) {
> @@ -89,7 +89,7 @@ static void set_counter(MOS6522State *s, MOS6522Timer *ti, unsigned int val)
>   }
>   
>   static int64_t get_next_irq_time(MOS6522State *s, MOS6522Timer *ti,
> -                                 int64_t current_time)
> +                                 int64_t now)
>   {
>       int64_t d, next_time;
>       unsigned int counter;
> @@ -99,7 +99,7 @@ static int64_t get_next_irq_time(MOS6522State *s, MOS6522Timer *ti,
>       }
>   
>       /* current counter value */
> -    d = muldiv64(qemu_clock_get_ns(QEMU_CLOCK_VIRTUAL) - ti->load_time,
> +    d = muldiv64(now - ti->load_time,
>                    ti->frequency, NANOSECONDS_PER_SECOND);
>   
>       /* the timer goes down from latch to -1 (period of latch + 2) */
> @@ -123,20 +123,19 @@ static int64_t get_next_irq_time(MOS6522State *s, MOS6522Timer *ti,
>       trace_mos6522_get_next_irq_time(ti->latch, d, next_time - d);
>       next_time = muldiv64(next_time, NANOSECONDS_PER_SECOND, ti->frequency) +
>                            ti->load_time;
> -
> -    if (next_time <= current_time) {
> -        next_time = current_time + 1;
> -    }
>       return next_time;
>   }
>   
>   static void mos6522_timer1_update(MOS6522State *s, MOS6522Timer *ti,
> -                                 int64_t current_time)
> +                                  int64_t now)
>   {
>       if (!ti->timer) {
>           return;
>       }
> -    ti->next_irq_time = get_next_irq_time(s, ti, current_time);
> +    ti->next_irq_time = get_next_irq_time(s, ti, now);
> +    if (ti->next_irq_time <= now) {
> +        ti->next_irq_time = now + 1;
> +    }
>       if ((s->ier & T1_INT) == 0 ||
>           ((s->acr & T1MODE) == T1MODE_ONESHOT && ti->oneshot_fired)) {
>           timer_del(ti->timer);
> @@ -146,12 +145,15 @@ static void mos6522_timer1_update(MOS6522State *s, MOS6522Timer *ti,
>   }
>   
>   static void mos6522_timer2_update(MOS6522State *s, MOS6522Timer *ti,
> -                                 int64_t current_time)
> +                                  int64_t now)
>   {
>       if (!ti->timer) {
>           return;
>       }
> -    ti->next_irq_time = get_next_irq_time(s, ti, current_time);
> +    ti->next_irq_time = get_next_irq_time(s, ti, now);
> +    if (ti->next_irq_time <= now) {
> +        ti->next_irq_time = now + 1;
> +    }
>       if ((s->ier & T2_INT) == 0 || (s->acr & T2MODE) || ti->oneshot_fired) {
>           timer_del(ti->timer);
>       } else {
> @@ -163,9 +165,10 @@ static void mos6522_timer1_expired(void *opaque)
>   {
>       MOS6522State *s = opaque;
>       MOS6522Timer *ti = &s->timers[0];
> +    int64_t now = qemu_clock_get_ns(QEMU_CLOCK_VIRTUAL);
>   
>       ti->oneshot_fired = true;
> -    mos6522_timer1_update(s, ti, ti->next_irq_time);
> +    mos6522_timer1_update(s, ti, now);

Presumably using ti->next_irq_time has already fixed the current time to be that at 
which the timer routine actually expired, rather than the current executing time. Are 
you seeing large differences in these numbers that can cause timer drift? If so, I'm 
wondering if this change should be in a separate patch.

>       s->ifr |= T1_INT;
>       mos6522_update_irq(s);
>   }
> @@ -174,9 +177,10 @@ static void mos6522_timer2_expired(void *opaque)
>   {
>       MOS6522State *s = opaque;
>       MOS6522Timer *ti = &s->timers[1];
> +    int64_t now = qemu_clock_get_ns(QEMU_CLOCK_VIRTUAL);
>   
>       ti->oneshot_fired = true;
> -    mos6522_timer2_update(s, ti, ti->next_irq_time);
> +    mos6522_timer2_update(s, ti, now);

And same again here.

>       s->ifr |= T2_INT;
>       mos6522_update_irq(s);
>   }
> @@ -233,12 +237,12 @@ uint64_t mos6522_read(void *opaque, hwaddr addr, unsigned size)
>           val = s->dira;
>           break;
>       case VIA_REG_T1CL:
> -        val = get_counter(s, &s->timers[0]) & 0xff;
> +        val = get_counter(s, &s->timers[0], now) & 0xff;
>           s->ifr &= ~T1_INT;
>           mos6522_update_irq(s);
>           break;
>       case VIA_REG_T1CH:
> -        val = get_counter(s, &s->timers[0]) >> 8;
> +        val = get_counter(s, &s->timers[0], now) >> 8;
>           break;
>       case VIA_REG_T1LL:
>           val = s->timers[0].latch & 0xff;
> @@ -247,12 +251,12 @@ uint64_t mos6522_read(void *opaque, hwaddr addr, unsigned size)
>           val = (s->timers[0].latch >> 8) & 0xff;
>           break;
>       case VIA_REG_T2CL:
> -        val = get_counter(s, &s->timers[1]) & 0xff;
> +        val = get_counter(s, &s->timers[1], now) & 0xff;
>           s->ifr &= ~T2_INT;
>           mos6522_update_irq(s);
>           break;
>       case VIA_REG_T2CH:
> -        val = get_counter(s, &s->timers[1]) >> 8;
> +        val = get_counter(s, &s->timers[1], now) >> 8;
>           break;
>       case VIA_REG_SR:
>           val = s->sr;
> @@ -360,10 +364,9 @@ void mos6522_write(void *opaque, hwaddr addr, uint64_t val, unsigned size)
>           }
>           mos6522_update_irq(s);
>           /* if IER is modified starts needed timers */
> -        mos6522_timer1_update(s, &s->timers[0],
> -                              qemu_clock_get_ns(QEMU_CLOCK_VIRTUAL));
> -        mos6522_timer2_update(s, &s->timers[1],
> -                              qemu_clock_get_ns(QEMU_CLOCK_VIRTUAL));
> +        now = qemu_clock_get_ns(QEMU_CLOCK_VIRTUAL);
> +        mos6522_timer1_update(s, &s->timers[0], now);
> +        mos6522_timer2_update(s, &s->timers[1], now);
>           break;
>       default:
>           g_assert_not_reached();

In terms of functionality it shouldn't really matter (since you have a ns clock 
compared with a timer that can manage small frequencies in comparison) but I can see 
how having a constant clock time throughout the entire calculation process could be 
useful for debugging.


ATB,

Mark.


  parent reply	other threads:[~2021-08-25  8:45 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 47+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-08-24 10:09 [RFC 00/10] hw/mos6522: VIA timer emulation fixes and improvements Finn Thain
2021-08-24 10:09 ` [RFC 09/10] hw/mos6522: Avoid using discrepant QEMU clock values Finn Thain
2021-08-24 10:28   ` Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
2021-08-29  1:23     ` Finn Thain
2021-08-25  8:44   ` Mark Cave-Ayland [this message]
2021-08-29  1:55     ` Finn Thain
2021-08-24 10:09 ` [RFC 06/10] hw/mos6522: Implement oneshot mode Finn Thain
2021-08-25  8:18   ` Mark Cave-Ayland
2021-08-29  1:20     ` Finn Thain
2021-08-24 10:09 ` [RFC 01/10] hw/mos6522: Remove get_load_time() methods and functions Finn Thain
2021-08-24 10:29   ` Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
2021-08-25  6:55   ` Mark Cave-Ayland
2021-08-28  1:00     ` Finn Thain
2021-08-24 10:09 ` [RFC 08/10] hw/mos6522: Call mos6522_update_irq() when appropriate Finn Thain
2021-08-24 10:22   ` Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
2021-08-25  8:26   ` Mark Cave-Ayland
2021-08-24 10:09 ` [RFC 07/10] hw/mos6522: Fix initial timer counter reload Finn Thain
2021-08-25  8:23   ` Mark Cave-Ayland
2021-08-28  0:46     ` Finn Thain
2021-08-24 10:09 ` [RFC 10/10] hw/mos6522: Synchronize timer interrupt and timer counter Finn Thain
2021-08-25  8:52   ` Mark Cave-Ayland
2021-08-26  6:43     ` Finn Thain
2021-08-24 10:09 ` [RFC 04/10] hw/mos6522: Rename timer callback functions Finn Thain
2021-08-24 10:28   ` Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
2021-08-25  7:11   ` Mark Cave-Ayland
2021-08-26  7:42     ` Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
2021-08-24 10:09 ` [RFC 02/10] hw/mos6522: Remove get_counter_value() methods and functions Finn Thain
2021-08-24 10:29   ` Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
2021-08-24 10:09 ` [RFC 05/10] hw/mos6522: Don't clear T1 interrupt flag on latch write Finn Thain
2021-08-25  7:20   ` Mark Cave-Ayland
2021-08-26  5:21     ` Finn Thain
2021-09-01 14:32       ` Laurent Vivier
2021-09-01 22:26         ` Finn Thain
2021-08-24 10:09 ` [RFC 03/10] hw/mos6522: Remove redundant mos6522_timer1_update() calls Finn Thain
2021-08-25  7:09   ` Mark Cave-Ayland
2021-08-24 10:34 ` [RFC 00/10] hw/mos6522: VIA timer emulation fixes and improvements Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
2021-08-28  1:22   ` Finn Thain
2021-08-31 21:14     ` Mark Cave-Ayland
2021-08-31 22:44       ` Finn Thain
2021-09-01  7:57         ` Mark Cave-Ayland
2021-09-01  8:06           ` Mark Cave-Ayland
2021-09-10 17:29             ` Mark Cave-Ayland
2021-09-11  0:08               ` Finn Thain
2021-09-01  2:20       ` Finn Thain
2021-08-25  3:11 ` David Gibson
2021-08-25  9:10 ` Mark Cave-Ayland
2021-08-28  4:11   ` Finn Thain

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=157fd841-9a1f-3f8e-1a29-ab79305843c9@ilande.co.uk \
    --to=mark.cave-ayland@ilande.co.uk \
    --cc=david@gibson.dropbear.id.au \
    --cc=fthain@linux-m68k.org \
    --cc=groug@kaod.org \
    --cc=laurent@vivier.eu \
    --cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
    --cc=qemu-ppc@nongnu.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.