[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH v4 4/6] x86/time: introduce probing logic for the wallclock
- To: Roger Pau Monne <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx>
- From: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2024 17:58:47 +0200
- Autocrypt: addr=jbeulich@xxxxxxxx; keydata= xsDiBFk3nEQRBADAEaSw6zC/EJkiwGPXbWtPxl2xCdSoeepS07jW8UgcHNurfHvUzogEq5xk hu507c3BarVjyWCJOylMNR98Yd8VqD9UfmX0Hb8/BrA+Hl6/DB/eqGptrf4BSRwcZQM32aZK 7Pj2XbGWIUrZrd70x1eAP9QE3P79Y2oLrsCgbZJfEwCgvz9JjGmQqQkRiTVzlZVCJYcyGGsD /0tbFCzD2h20ahe8rC1gbb3K3qk+LpBtvjBu1RY9drYk0NymiGbJWZgab6t1jM7sk2vuf0Py O9Hf9XBmK0uE9IgMaiCpc32XV9oASz6UJebwkX+zF2jG5I1BfnO9g7KlotcA/v5ClMjgo6Gl MDY4HxoSRu3i1cqqSDtVlt+AOVBJBACrZcnHAUSuCXBPy0jOlBhxPqRWv6ND4c9PH1xjQ3NP nxJuMBS8rnNg22uyfAgmBKNLpLgAGVRMZGaGoJObGf72s6TeIqKJo/LtggAS9qAUiuKVnygo 3wjfkS9A3DRO+SpU7JqWdsveeIQyeyEJ/8PTowmSQLakF+3fote9ybzd880fSmFuIEJldWxp Y2ggPGpiZXVsaWNoQHN1c2UuY29tPsJgBBMRAgAgBQJZN5xEAhsDBgsJCAcDAgQVAggDBBYC AwECHgECF4AACgkQoDSui/t3IH4J+wCfQ5jHdEjCRHj23O/5ttg9r9OIruwAn3103WUITZee e7Sbg12UgcQ5lv7SzsFNBFk3nEQQCACCuTjCjFOUdi5Nm244F+78kLghRcin/awv+IrTcIWF hUpSs1Y91iQQ7KItirz5uwCPlwejSJDQJLIS+QtJHaXDXeV6NI0Uef1hP20+y8qydDiVkv6l IreXjTb7DvksRgJNvCkWtYnlS3mYvQ9NzS9PhyALWbXnH6sIJd2O9lKS1Mrfq+y0IXCP10eS FFGg+Av3IQeFatkJAyju0PPthyTqxSI4lZYuJVPknzgaeuJv/2NccrPvmeDg6Coe7ZIeQ8Yj t0ARxu2xytAkkLCel1Lz1WLmwLstV30g80nkgZf/wr+/BXJW/oIvRlonUkxv+IbBM3dX2OV8 AmRv1ySWPTP7AAMFB/9PQK/VtlNUJvg8GXj9ootzrteGfVZVVT4XBJkfwBcpC/XcPzldjv+3 HYudvpdNK3lLujXeA5fLOH+Z/G9WBc5pFVSMocI71I8bT8lIAzreg0WvkWg5V2WZsUMlnDL9 mpwIGFhlbM3gfDMs7MPMu8YQRFVdUvtSpaAs8OFfGQ0ia3LGZcjA6Ik2+xcqscEJzNH+qh8V m5jjp28yZgaqTaRbg3M/+MTbMpicpZuqF4rnB0AQD12/3BNWDR6bmh+EkYSMcEIpQmBM51qM EKYTQGybRCjpnKHGOxG0rfFY1085mBDZCH5Kx0cl0HVJuQKC+dV2ZY5AqjcKwAxpE75MLFkr wkkEGBECAAkFAlk3nEQCGwwACgkQoDSui/t3IH7nnwCfcJWUDUFKdCsBH/E5d+0ZnMQi+G0A nAuWpQkjM1ASeQwSHEeAWPgskBQL
- Cc: "Daniel P. Smith" <dpsmith@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Marek Marczykowski-Górecki <marmarek@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>, xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Delivery-date: Thu, 05 Sep 2024 15:58:56 +0000
- List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xenproject.org>
On 04.09.2024 17:31, Roger Pau Monne wrote:
> --- a/xen/arch/x86/time.c
> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/time.c
> @@ -1291,14 +1291,23 @@ static bool __get_cmos_time(struct rtc_time *rtc)
> return t1 <= SECONDS(1) && t2 < MILLISECS(3);
> }
>
> -static bool cmos_probe(struct rtc_time *rtc_p, bool cmos_rtc_probe)
> +static bool __initdata cmos_rtc_probe;
> +boolean_param("cmos-rtc-probe", cmos_rtc_probe);
> +
> +static bool __init cmos_probe(void)
I'm sorry for not paying attention to this earlier, but "cmos" alone
is misleading here and perhaps even more so for cmos_read(). These
aren't about the CMOS (storage) but the CMOS RTC. May I suggest
cmos_rtc_{probe,read}() instead?
> {
> unsigned int seconds = 60;
>
> + if ( !(acpi_gbl_FADT.boot_flags & ACPI_FADT_NO_CMOS_RTC) )
> + return true;
> +
> + if ( !cmos_rtc_probe )
> + return false;
With this I think ...
> for ( ; ; )
> {
> - bool success = __get_cmos_time(rtc_p);
> - struct rtc_time rtc = *rtc_p;
> + struct rtc_time rtc;
> + bool success = __get_cmos_time(&rtc);
>
> if ( likely(!cmos_rtc_probe) )
> return true;
... this ends up being dead code.
Jan
|
