From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1752738AbbLaXhW (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Thu, 31 Dec 2015 18:37:22 -0500
Received: from smtp20.mail.ru ([94.100.179.251]:60508 "EHLO smtp20.mail.ru"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1751104AbbLaXhS convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Thu, 31 Dec 2015 18:37:18 -0500
Date: Fri, 1 Jan 2016 02:32:08 +0300
From: Roman Volkov <v1ron@mail.ru>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: arm@kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
        Alexey Charkov <alchark@gmail.com>, Roman Volkov <rvolkov@v1ros.org>,
        Tony Prisk <linux@prisktech.co.nz>,
        Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>,
        Bill Gatliff <bgat@billgatliff.com>,
        Robert Jarzmik <robert.jarzmik@free.fr>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 RESEND 1/3] clocksource/vt8500: Use MIN_OSCR_DELTA
 from PXA
Message-ID: <20160101023208.7721e085@v1ron-s7>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.11.1512312331580.28591@nanos>
References: <1451584927-4051-1-git-send-email-v1ron@mail.ru>
	<1451584927-4051-2-git-send-email-v1ron@mail.ru>
	<alpine.DEB.2.11.1512312331580.28591@nanos>
X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.13.1 (GTK+ 2.24.29; x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT
X-Mras: Ok
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

В Thu, 31 Dec 2015 23:33:45 +0100 (CET)
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> пишет:

> Roman,
> 
> On Thu, 31 Dec 2015, Roman Volkov wrote:
> > Since vt8500 and PXA timers are identical, use MIN_OSCR_DELTA from
> > PXA, which is bigger than existing value. It is required to
> > determine the minimum delay which hardware can generate.  
> 
> Now that brings up the obvious question:
> 
> If the vt8500 and PXA timers are identical why has vt8500 it's own
> slightly different implementation and does not use the PXA timer?

Thomas,

I occasionally noticed that the PXA can be reused, when working on the
bugfix for vt8500. Another good question would be how exactly this code
can be reused. We may rework PXA driver to make it working under
vt8500, or include the C code from the vt8500 and get two slightly
different modules. You may look at our previous discussion with Alexey:

https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/12/21/437

Adding Robert and Bill to get more opinions. At this step, fixing the
vt8500 nanosleep bug is a priority.

Happy New Year,
Roman