timer: add High Precision Event Timers (HPET) support
PATCH v2 1/1 timer: add High Precision Event Timers (HPET) support
Adding HPET as an alternative timer for x86 (default is TSC). HPET counter has constant frequency and does not need calibration. This change also makes TSC timer driver optional on x86. If X86_TSC is disabled, early timer functions are provided by HPET.
--- arch/Kconfig | 2 +- arch/x86/dts/hpet.dtsi | 7 ++ drivers/timer/Kconfig | 6 ++ drivers/timer/Makefile | 1 + drivers/timer/hpet_timer.c | 191 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 5 files changed, 206 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) create mode 100644 arch/x86/dts/hpet.dtsi create mode 100644 drivers/timer/hpet_timer.c
arch/Kconfig +1 -1
@@ -104,7 +104,7 @@ config X86 select DM_PCI select PCI select TIMER - select X86_TSC_TIMER + imply X86_TSC_TIMER imply BLK imply DM_ETH imply DM_GPIO
arch/x86/dts/hpet.dtsi new file +7 -0
@@ -0,0 +1,7 @@ +/ { + hpet0: hpet at fed00000 { + compatible = "hpet-x86"; + u-boot,dm-pre-reloc; + reg = <0xfed00000 0x1000>; + }; +};
drivers/timer/Kconfig +6 -0
@@ -65,6 +65,12 @@ config X86_TSC_TIMER help Select this to enable Time-Stamp Counter (TSC) timer for x86. +config HPET_TIMER + bool "High Precision Event Timers (HPET) support" + depends on TIMER && X86 + help + Select this to enable High Precision Event Timers (HPET) for x86. + config OMAP_TIMER bool "Omap timer support" depends on TIMER
drivers/timer/Makefile +1 -0
@@ -8,6 +8,7 @@ obj-y += timer-uclass.o obj-$(CONFIG_ALTERA_TIMER) += altera_timer.o obj-$(CONFIG_SANDBOX_TIMER) += sandbox_timer.o obj-$(CONFIG_X86_TSC_TIMER) += tsc_timer.o +obj-$(CONFIG_HPET_TIMER) += hpet_timer.o obj-$(CONFIG_OMAP_TIMER) += omap-timer.o obj-$(CONFIG_AST_TIMER) += ast_timer.o obj-$(CONFIG_STI_TIMER) += sti-timer.o
drivers/timer/hpet_timer.c new file +191 -0
191 lines not on this page · raw message
Signature · 1 line
2.7.4
PATCH v2 1/1 timer: add High Precision Event Timers (HPET) support
Hi Ivan,
Quoted 35 lines · Ivan Gorinov
Adding HPET as an alternative timer for x86 (default is TSC). HPET counter has constant frequency and does not need calibration. This change also makes TSC timer driver optional on x86. If
X86_TSCis disabled, early timer functions are provided by HPET.Signed-off-by Ivan Gorinov <[email protected]>--- arch/Kconfig | 2 +- arch/x86/dts/hpet.dtsi | 7 ++ drivers/timer/Kconfig | 6 ++ drivers/timer/Makefile | 1 + drivers/timer/hpet_timer.c | 191 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 5 files changed, 206 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) create mode 100644 arch/x86/dts/hpet.dtsi create mode 100644 drivers/timer/hpet_timer.carch/Kconfig +1
-1@@ -104,7 +104,7 @@ config X86 select DM_PCI select PCI select TIMER - select X86_TSC_TIMER + imply X86_TSC_TIMER imply BLK imply DM_ETH imply DM_GPIOarch/x86/dts/hpet.dtsi new file +0
-0
arch/x86/dts/hpet.dtsi line 2
Quoted 2 lines
arch/x86/dts/hpet.dtsi new file +2
-0@@ -0,0 +1,7 @@ +/ { + hpet0: hpet at fed00000 {
nits: use 'hpet' instead of 'hpet0'? since there is only one hpet timer in the system.
Quoted 52 lines
arch/x86/dts/hpet.dtsi new file +5
-0+ compatible = "hpet-x86"; + u-boot,dm-pre-reloc; + reg = <0xfed00000 0x1000>; + }; +};drivers/timer/Kconfig +6
-0@@ -65,6 +65,12 @@ config X86_TSC_TIMER help Select this to enable Time-Stamp Counter (TSC) timer for x86. +config HPET_TIMER + bool "High Precision Event Timers (HPET) support" + depends on TIMER && X86 + help + Select this to enable High Precision Event Timers (HPET) for x86. + config OMAP_TIMER bool "Omap timer support" depends on TIMERdrivers/timer/Makefile +1
-0@@ -8,6 +8,7 @@ obj-y += timer-uclass.o obj-$(CONFIG_ALTERA_TIMER) += altera_timer.o obj-$(CONFIG_SANDBOX_TIMER) += sandbox_timer.o obj-$(CONFIG_X86_TSC_TIMER) += tsc_timer.o +obj-$(CONFIG_HPET_TIMER) += hpet_timer.o obj-$(CONFIG_OMAP_TIMER) += omap-timer.o obj-$(CONFIG_AST_TIMER) += ast_timer.o obj-$(CONFIG_STI_TIMER) += sti-timer.odrivers/timer/hpet_timer.c new file +12
-0@@ -0,0 +1,191 @@ +/* +* Copyright (c) 2017 Intel Corporation +* +* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+ +*/ + +#include <common.h> +#include <dm.h> +#include <malloc.h> +#include <timer.h> +#include <asm/cpu.h> +#include <asm/io.h>
drivers/timer/hpet_timer.c line 22
Quoted 10 lines
drivers/timer/hpet_timer.c new file +10
-0+#include <asm/u-boot-x86.h> + +#define HPET_PERIOD_REG 0x004 +#define HPET_CONFIG_REG 0x010 +#define HPET_MAIN_COUNT_L 0x0f0 +#define HPET_MAIN_COUNT_H 0x0f4 + +#define HPET_MAX_PERIOD 100000000 + +DECLARE_GLOBAL_DATA_PTR ;
This is not needed.
Quoted 19 lines
drivers/timer/hpet_timer.c new file +19
-0+ +struct hpet_timer_priv { +void *regs; +}; + +/* +* Returns HPET clock frequency in HZ +* (rounding to the nearest integer), +* or 0 if HPET is not available. +*/ +static inline u32 get_clock_frequency (void *regs) +{ +u64 d =1000000000000000ull ; +u32 period; + + period =readl (regs +HPET_PERIOD_REG ); +if (period ==0 ) +return 0 ; +if (period >HPET_MAX_PERIOD )
drivers/timer/hpet_timer.c line 51
Quoted 10 lines
drivers/timer/hpet_timer.c new file +10
-0+return 0 ; + + d += period /2 ; + +return d / period; +} + +/* +* Reset and start the main counter. +*/
nits: use one line comment format
Quoted 53 lines
drivers/timer/hpet_timer.c new file +53
-0+static void start_main_counter (void *regs) +{ +u32 config; + + config =readl (regs +HPET_CONFIG_REG ); + config &= ~1 ; +writel (config, regs +HPET_CONFIG_REG ); +writel (0 , regs +HPET_MAIN_COUNT_L ); +writel (0 , regs +HPET_MAIN_COUNT_H ); + config |=1 ; +writel (config, regs +HPET_CONFIG_REG ); +} + +/* +* Read the main counter as two 32-bit registers, +* repeat if rollover happens. +*/ +static u64 read_main_counter (void *regs) +{ +u64 now_tick; +u32 tl, th, th0; + + th =readl (regs +HPET_MAIN_COUNT_H ); +do { + th0 = th; + tl =readl (regs +HPET_MAIN_COUNT_L ); + th =readl (regs +HPET_MAIN_COUNT_H ); + }while (th != th0); + + now_tick = th; + now_tick <<=32 ; + now_tick |= tl; + +return now_tick; +} + +static int hpet_timer_get_count (struct udevice *dev,u64 *count) +{ +struct hpet_timer_priv *priv =dev_get_priv (dev); + + *count =read_main_counter (priv->regs); + +return 0 ; +} + +static int hpet_timer_probe (struct udevice *dev) +{ +struct timer_dev_priv *uc_priv =dev_get_uclass_priv (dev); +struct hpet_timer_priv *priv =dev_get_priv (dev); +u32 rate; + + rate =get_clock_frequency (priv->regs); +if (rate ==0 )
drivers/timer/hpet_timer.c line 114
Quoted 10 lines
drivers/timer/hpet_timer.c new file +10
-0+return -ENODEV ; + +start_main_counter (priv->regs); + + uc_priv->clock_rate = rate; + +return 0 ; +} + +#ifndef CONFIG_X86_TSC_TIMER
This looks not good. If we support more timers on x86, the #ifdef logic will become un-maintainable. Can we support such from the timer library instead?
Quoted 68 lines
drivers/timer/hpet_timer.c new file +68
-0+ +static void *early_regs = (void *)CONFIG_HPET_ADDRESS ; + +unsigned long notrace timer_early_get_rate (void ) +{ +return get_clock_frequency (early_regs); +} + +u64 notrace timer_early_get_count(void) +{ +return read_main_counter (early_regs); +} + +int timer_init (void ) +{ +if (get_clock_frequency (early_regs) ==0 ) +return -ENODEV ; + +start_main_counter (early_regs); + +return 0 ; +} + +ulong timer_get_boot_us (void ) +{ +u32 period; +u64 d; + + period =readl (early_regs +HPET_PERIOD_REG ); +if (period ==0 ) +return 0 ; +if (period >HPET_MAX_PERIOD ) +return 0 ; + + d =read_main_counter (early_regs); + +/* +* Multiplication overflow +* at 2^64 femtoseconds +* (more than 5 hours) +*/ + + d *= period; + +return d /1000000000 ; +} + +#endif /* CONFIG_X86_TSC_TIMER */ + +static int hpet_timer_ofdata_to_platdata (struct udevice *dev) +{ +struct hpet_timer_priv *priv =dev_get_priv (dev); + priv->regs =map_physmem (devfdt_get_addr (dev),0x1000 ,MAP_NOCACHE ); + +return 0 ; +} + +static const struct timer_ops hpet_timer_ops = { + .get_count = hpet_timer_get_count, +}; + +static const struct udevice_id hpet_timer_ids[] = { + { .compatible ="hpet-x86" , }, + { .compatible ="intel,ce4100-hpet" , }, + { } +}; + +U_BOOT_DRIVER (hpet_timer) = {
drivers/timer/hpet_timer.c
Quoted 10 lines
drivers/timer/hpet_timer.c new file +9
-1+ .name = "hpet_timer", + .id = UCLASS_TIMER, + .of_match = hpet_timer_ids, + .ofdata_to_platdata = hpet_timer_ofdata_to_platdata, + .priv_auto_alloc_size = sizeof(struct hpet_timer_priv), + .probe = hpet_timer_probe, + .ops = &hpet_timer_ops, + .flags = DM_FLAG_PRE_RELOC, +}; --
I will try to test this patch on several x86 boards.
Regards,
Bin
PATCH v2 1/1 timer: add High Precision Event Timers (HPET) support
In reply to Ivan GorinovQuoted 7 lines · Ivan Gorinov
Adding HPET as an alternative timer for x86 (default is TSC). HPET counter has constant frequency and does not need calibration. This change also makes TSC timer driver optional on x86. If
X86_TSCis disabled, early timer functions are provided by HPET.Signed-off-by Ivan Gorinov <[email protected]>---
Changelog?
drivers/timer/Kconfig config X86_TSC_TIMER · line 70
Quoted 5 lines
arch/Kconfig | 2 +-drivers/timer/Kconfig +3
-0+config HPET_TIMER + bool "High Precision Event Timers (HPET) support" + depends on TIMER && X86
Does X86 makes any difference from building point of view?
drivers/timer/hpet_timer.c line 58
Quoted 3 lines
drivers/timer/hpet_timer.c new file +3
-0+ config =readl (regs +HPET_CONFIG_REG ); + config &= ~1 ; +writel (config, regs +HPET_CONFIG_REG );
1 or BIT(0) is magic. Can be fixed in all places?
drivers/timer/hpet_timer.c line 60
Quoted 2 lines
drivers/timer/hpet_timer.c new file +2
-0+writel (0 , regs +HPET_MAIN_COUNT_L ); +writel (0 , regs +HPET_MAIN_COUNT_H );
Can we use writeq() here?
drivers/timer/hpet_timer.c line 78
Quoted 2 lines
drivers/timer/hpet_timer.c new file +2
-0+ tl =readl (regs +HPET_MAIN_COUNT_L ); + th =readl (regs +HPET_MAIN_COUNT_H );
Ditto.
Signature · 2 lines
With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko
PATCH v2 1/1 timer: add High Precision Event Timers (HPET) support
Quoted 4 lines · Andy Shevchenko
drivers/timer/hpet_timer.c line 60
Quoted 2 lines
drivers/timer/hpet_timer.c new file +2
-0+writel (0 , regs +HPET_MAIN_COUNT_L ); +writel (0 , regs +HPET_MAIN_COUNT_H );Can we use
writeq()here?
I don't see readq/writeq defined for x86, even x86_64.
Quoted 4 lines
drivers/timer/hpet_timer.c line 78
Quoted 2 lines
drivers/timer/hpet_timer.c new file +2
-0+ tl =readl (regs +HPET_MAIN_COUNT_L ); + th =readl (regs +HPET_MAIN_COUNT_H );Ditto.
If readq() is defined as two read operations in 32-bit code, main counter rollover (low part overflow, high part increment) can happen between them.
PATCH v2 1/1 timer: add High Precision Event Timers (HPET) support
Quoted 9 lines · Ivan Gorinov
Quoted 4 lines · Andy Shevchenko
drivers/timer/hpet_timer.c line 60
Quoted 2 lines
drivers/timer/hpet_timer.c new file +2
-0+writel (0 , regs +HPET_MAIN_COUNT_L ); +writel (0 , regs +HPET_MAIN_COUNT_H );Can we use
writeq()here?I don't see readq/writeq defined for x86, even
x86_64.
read_le64() and write_le64() in U-Boot source code.
Besides that there are memcpy_toio() / memcpy_fromio() defined (didn't check if they are really implemented).
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 4 lines
drivers/timer/hpet_timer.c line 78
Quoted 2 lines
drivers/timer/hpet_timer.c new file +2
-0+ tl =readl (regs +HPET_MAIN_COUNT_L ); + th =readl (regs +HPET_MAIN_COUNT_H );Ditto.
If
readq()is defined as two read operations in 32-bit code, main counter rollover (low part overflow, high part increment) can happen between them.
And how this contradicts ther current code?
Signature · 2 lines
With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko
PATCH v2 1/1 timer: add High Precision Event Timers (HPET) support
Quoted 9 lines · Andy Shevchenko
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 4 lines
drivers/timer/hpet_timer.c line 78
Quoted 2 lines
drivers/timer/hpet_timer.c new file +2
-0+ tl =readl (regs +HPET_MAIN_COUNT_L ); + th =readl (regs +HPET_MAIN_COUNT_H );Ditto.
If
readq()is defined as two read operations in 32-bit code, main counter rollover (low part overflow, high part increment) can happen between them.And how this contradicts ther current code?
It just does not make the code simpler, rollover check is still required if U-Boot is compiled as 32-bit code.
Can we do something like the following?
#ifdef CONFIG_X86_64
static u64 read_main_counter(void *regs)
{
return readq(regs + HPET_MAIN_COUNT);
}#else
/*
* Read the main counter as two 32-bit registers,
* repeat if rollover happens.
*/
static u64 read_main_counter(void *regs)
{
u64 now_tick;
u32 tl, th, th0;
th = readl(regs + HPET_MAIN_COUNT_H);
do {
th0 = th;
tl = readl(regs + HPET_MAIN_COUNT_L);
th = readl(regs + HPET_MAIN_COUNT_H);
now_tick = th;
now_tick <<= 32;
now_tick |= tl;
} while (th != th0);
return now_tick;
}#endif
PATCH v2 1/1 timer: add High Precision Event Timers (HPET) support
Quoted 4 lines · Ivan Gorinov
Quoted 3 lines · Andy Shevchenko
Quoted 3 lines
Quoted 3 lines
Quoted 2 lines
drivers/timer/hpet_timer.c new file +2
-0+ tl =readl (regs +HPET_MAIN_COUNT_L ); + th =readl (regs +HPET_MAIN_COUNT_H );
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 6 lines
Quoted 4 lines
Quoted 1 line
Ditto.
If
readq()is defined as two read operations in 32-bit code, main counter rollover (low part overflow, high part increment) can happen between them.And how this contradicts ther current code?
It just does not make the code simpler,
...b/c you misread what I suggested.
Quoted 4 lines
rollover check is
still required if U-Boot is compiled as 32-bit code.Can we do something like the following?
Yes, but... why?
What's wrong with replacing two sequential 32-bit reads with one 64-bit?
See below.
Quoted 14 lines
#ifdef
CONFIG_X86_64static u64
read_main_counter(void *regs){ return readq(regs + HPET_MAIN_COUNT); }#else
/*
* Read the main counter as two 32-bit registers,
* repeat if rollover happens.
*/
static u64read_main_counter(void *regs)
Quoted 6 lines
{
u64 now_tick;
u32 tl, th, th0;
th = readl(regs + HPET_MAIN_COUNT_H);
do {now_tick = readq();
Quoted 8 lines
th0 = th;
tl = readl(regs + HPET_MAIN_COUNT_L);
th = readl(regs + HPET_MAIN_COUNT_H);
now_tick = th;
now_tick <<= 32;
now_tick |= tl;
} while (th != th0);} while (th != (now_tick >> 32));
Quoted 5 lines
return now_tick; }#endif
Signature · 2 lines
With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko
PATCH v2 1/1 timer: add High Precision Event Timers (HPET) support
Quoted 10 lines · Andy Shevchenko
Quoted 4 lines
Quoted 3 lines
Quoted 2 lines
If
readq()is defined as two read operations in 32-bit code, main counter rollover (low part overflow, high part increment) can happen between them.And how this contradicts ther current code?
It just does not make the code simpler,
...b/c you misread what I suggested.
Quoted 3 lines
rollover check is
still required if U-Boot is compiled as 32-bit code. Can we do something like the following?Yes, but... why?
What's wrong with replacing two sequential 32-bit reads with one 64-bit?
Doesn't readX/writeX imply a single I/O operation? It may be misleading to define it as two.
Assuming MMX or SSE2 to be supported by all x86 processors, 64-bit I/O registers can be accessed as a single operation even in 32-bit code:
static inline u64 readq(void *addr)
{
u64 value;
asm volatile ("movq (%0), %%xmm0" : : "r" (addr));
asm volatile ("movq %%xmm0, %0" : "=m" (value));
return value;
}I can add these definitions to "asm/io.h".
PATCH v2 1/1 timer: add High Precision Event Timers (HPET) support
Quoted 9 lines · Ivan Gorinov
Quoted 8 lines · Andy Shevchenko
Quoted 4 lines
Quoted 3 lines
Quoted 2 lines
If
readq()is defined as two read operations in 32-bit code, main counter rollover (low part overflow, high part increment) can happen between them.And how this contradicts ther current code?
It just does not make the code simpler,
...b/c you misread what I suggested.
Quoted 3 lines
rollover check is
still required if U-Boot is compiled as 32-bit code. Can we do something like the following?
Quoted 9 lines
Quoted 2 lines
Yes, but... why?
What's wrong with replacing two sequential 32-bit reads with one 64-bit?Doesn't readX/writeX imply a single I/O operation? It may be misleading to define it as two.
Assuming MMX or SSE2 to be supported by all x86 processors, 64-bit I/O registers can be accessed as a single operation even in 32-bit code:
Adding such requirement (MMX or SSE2) to U-Boot is not good. Why do we require MMX or SSE2 for readq? Can we use general purpose registers?
Quoted 11 lines
static inline u64
readq(void *addr){ u64 value; asm volatile ("movq (%0), %%xmm0" : : "r" (addr)); asm volatile ("movq %%xmm0, %0" : "=m" (value)); return value; }I can add these definitions to "
asm/io.h".
Regards,
Bin
PATCH v2 1/1 timer: add High Precision Event Timers (HPET) support
Quoted 9 lines · Bin Meng
Quoted 6 lines
Doesn't readX/writeX imply a single I/O operation? It may be misleading to define it as two.
Assuming MMX or SSE2 to be supported by all x86 processors, 64-bit I/O registers can be accessed as a single operation even in 32-bit code:
Adding such requirement (MMX or SSE2) to U-Boot is not good. Why do we require MMX or SSE2 for readq? Can we use general purpose registers?
In 32-bit code, we can't make a 64-bit memory read operation using only general purpose registers.
Quoted 12 lines
Quoted 12 lines
static inline u64
readq(void *addr){ u64 value; asm volatile ("movq (%0), %%xmm0" : : "r" (addr)); asm volatile ("movq %%xmm0, %0" : "=m" (value)); return value; }I can add these definitions to "
asm/io.h".
PATCH v2 1/1 timer: add High Precision Event Timers (HPET) support
In reply to Ivan GorinovQuoted 5 lines · Ivan Gorinov
Quoted 4 lines · Andy Shevchenko
Quoted 4 lines
Quoted 3 lines
Quoted 2 lines
If
readq()is defined as two read operations in 32-bit code, main counter rollover (low part overflow, high part increment) can happen between them.And how this contradicts ther current code?
It just does not make the code simpler,
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 6 lines
...b/c you misread what I suggested.
Quoted 3 lines
rollover check is
still required if U-Boot is compiled as 32-bit code. Can we do something like the following?Yes, but... why?
What's wrong with replacing two sequential 32-bit reads with one 64-bit?Doesn't readX/writeX imply a single I/O operation?
Not always.
It depends on atomicity you would like to get.
On 32-bit platform it's impossible to do readq() at once.
Quoted 15 lines
It may be misleading to define it as two.
Assuming MMX or SSE2 to be supported by all x86 processors, 64-bit I/O registers can be accessed as a single operation even in 32-bit code:
static inline u64
readq(void *addr){ u64 value; asm volatile ("movq (%0), %%xmm0" : : "r" (addr)); asm volatile ("movq %%xmm0, %0" : "=m" (value)); return value; }
Quoted 1 line
I can add these definitions to "
asm/io.h".
Please, no. This is wrong approach.
Signature · 2 lines
With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko
PATCH v2 1/1 timer: add High Precision Event Timers (HPET) support
In reply to Ivan GorinovQuoted 8 lines · Ivan Gorinov
Quoted 7 lines · Bin Meng
Quoted 6 lines
Doesn't readX/writeX imply a single I/O operation? It may be misleading to define it as two.
Assuming MMX or SSE2 to be supported by all x86 processors, 64-bit I/O registers can be accessed as a single operation even in 32-bit code:
Quoted 5 lines
Quoted 2 lines
Adding such requirement (MMX or SSE2) to U-Boot is not good. Why do we require MMX or SSE2 for readq? Can we use general purpose registers?
In 32-bit code, we can't make a 64-bit memory read operation using only general purpose registers.
Exactly, that's why you have to use non-atomic variants.
Signature · 2 lines
With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko