On Tue, Apr 15, 2025 at 9:50 AM Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, Apr 02, 2025 at 04:33:57PM -0700, Will McVicker wrote: > > From: Donghoon Yu <hoony.yu@xxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > On Arm64 platforms the Exynos MCT driver can be built as a module. On > > boot (and even after boot) the arch_timer is used as the clocksource and > > tick timer. Once the MCT driver is loaded, it can be used as the wakeup > > source for the arch_timer. > > From a previous thread where there is no answer: > > https://lore.kernel.org/all/c1e8abec-680c-451d-b5df-f687291aa413@xxxxxxxxxx/ > > I don't feel comfortable with changing the clocksource / clockevent drivers to > a module for the reasons explained in the aforementionned thread. I wasn't CC'ed on that, but to address a few of your points: > I have some concerns about this kind of changes: > > * the core code may not be prepared for that, so loading / unloading > the modules with active timers may result into some issues That's a fair concern, but permanent modules (which are loaded but not unloaded) shouldn't suffer this issue. I recognize having modules be fully unloadable is generally cleaner and preferred, but I also see the benefit of allowing permanent modules to be one-way loaded so a generic/distro kernel shared between lots of different platforms doesn't need to be bloated with drivers that aren't used everywhere. Obviously any single driver doesn't make a huge difference, but all the small drivers together does add up. > * it may end up with some interactions with cpuidle at boot time and > the broadcast timer Do you have more details as to your concerns here? I know there can be cases of issues if the built in clockevent drivers are problematic and the working ones don't load until later, you can have races where if the system goes into idle before the module loads it could stall out (there was a recent issue with an older iMac TSC halting in idle and it not reliably getting disqualified before it got stuck in idle). In those cases I could imagine folks reasonably arguing for including the working clock as a built in, but I'm not sure I'd say forcing everything to be built in is the better approach. > * the timekeeping may do jump in the past [if and] when switching the > clocksource ? It shouldn't. We've had tests in kselftest that switch between clocksources checking for inconsistencies for awhile, so if such a jump occurred it would be considered a bug. > * the GKI approach is to have an update for the 'mainline' kernel and > let the different SoC vendors deal with their drivers. I'm afraid this > will prevent driver fixes to be carry on upstream because they will stay > in the OoT kernels I'm not sure I understand this point? Could you expand on it a bit? While I very much can understand concerns and potential downsides of the GKI approach, I'm not sure how that applies to the submission here, as the benefit would apply to classic distro kernels as much as GKI. I realize in the time since I started this reply, Will has already covered much of the above! So apologies for being redundant. That said, there are some non-modularization changes in this series that should be considered even if the modularization logic is a continued sticking point. -john
