On Fri, 28 Jun 2013, Catalin Marinas wrote:

On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 04:58:40PM +0100, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:

quoted

On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 12:19:54PM +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote:

quoted

Hi all,
this patch series introduces stolen ticks accounting for Xen on ARM and
ARM64.
Stolen ticks are clocksource ticks that have been "stolen" from the cpu,
typically because Linux is running in a virtual machine and the vcpu has
been descheduled.
To account for these ticks we introduce CONFIG_PARAVIRT and pv_time_ops
so that we can make use of:

kernel/sched/cputime.c:steal_account_process_tick


Stefano Stabellini (6):
      xen: move xen_setup_runstate_info and get_runstate_snapshot to drivers/xen/time.c
      kernel: missing include in cputime.c
      arm: introduce CONFIG_PARAVIRT, PARAVIRT_TIME_ACCOUNTING and pv_time_ops
      arm64: introduce CONFIG_PARAVIRT, PARAVIRT_TIME_ACCOUNTING and pv_time_ops
      core: remove ifdef CONFIG_PARAVIRT
      xen/arm: account for stolen ticks

 arch/arm/Kconfig                  |   20 ++++++++
 arch/arm/include/asm/paravirt.h   |   20 ++++++++
 arch/arm/kernel/Makefile          |    1 +
 arch/arm/kernel/paravirt.c        |   25 ++++++++++
 arch/arm/xen/enlighten.c          |   21 +++++++++
 arch/arm64/Kconfig                |   20 ++++++++
 arch/arm64/include/asm/paravirt.h |   20 ++++++++
 arch/arm64/kernel/Makefile        |    1 +
 arch/arm64/kernel/paravirt.c      |   25 ++++++++++
 arch/ia64/xen/time.c              |   48 +++-----------------
 arch/x86/xen/time.c               |   76 +------------------------------

This is going to hit some of the patches that David
has sent to tglx, I think. You might want to try to rebase on top
of them (tip/time/for-xen, or something like that ) when they
are ready.

But for the Xen generic maintainer I am OK with these changes
so you can stick Acked-by on them.

Are you thinking to push them yourself or via the arm64 maintainer?

Once the core Xen support is pushed via the arm64 tree (queued for
3.11-rc1), I'm happy for the subsequent Xen patches to go directly
(similarly for KVM). But it's -rc7 now and I'm not taking any more
patches for the upcoming merging window (unless they are fixes).

The problem is that I haven't received any comments on the arm32
changes. Until I get a "go ahead" from Russell I don't feel comfortable
with sending a pull request to Linus with the third patch of the series
in it.

As a consequence I think I'll have to skip the next merge window.

After that, I might consider making this patch series arm64 only and
send it to Linus myself or via Catalin.