Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 8 Mar 2013 10:37:39 -0700
From:      Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com>
To:        Tim Kientzle <kientzle@freebsd.org>
Cc:        freebsd-arm@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: profclock overrides?
Message-ID:  <8437A197-5345-458E-8132-78FF0A2CF210@bsdimp.com>
In-Reply-To: <63983A6C-0D9F-46D1-BC4E-F7EE717EC676@freebsd.org>
References:  <63983A6C-0D9F-46D1-BC4E-F7EE717EC676@freebsd.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

On Mar 7, 2013, at 7:35 PM, Tim Kientzle wrote:

> As part of my poking and prodding towards a GENERIC kernel, I'm
> trying to see what happens when I actually combine the sources for
> different ARM systems together.
>=20
> Here's one problem that seems to appear with a lot of the ARM systems:
>=20
> ixp425_timer.o: In function `cpu_startprofclock':
> =
/usr/home/tim/projects/FreeBSD/svn/head/sys/arm/xscale/ixp425/ixp425_timer=
.c:263: multiple definition of `cpu_startprofclock'
> =
kern_clocksource.o:/usr/home/tim/projects/FreeBSD/svn/head/sys/kern/kern_c=
locksource.c:734: first defined here
> ixp425_timer.o: In function `cpu_stopprofclock':
> =
/usr/home/tim/projects/FreeBSD/svn/head/sys/arm/xscale/ixp425/ixp425_timer=
.c:268: multiple definition of `cpu_stopprofclock'
> =
kern_clocksource.o:/usr/home/tim/projects/FreeBSD/svn/head/sys/kern/kern_c=
locksource.c:754: first defined here
>=20
> It looks like a bunch of systems have overridden these two functions
> in order to disable the profclock.
>=20
> Is this an intrinsic board difference (that should be included in
> board/SoC-specific startup vectors), or is there a better way to
> do this?

I think we should add this to a platform-sw function table that each =
platform sets....

Warner




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?8437A197-5345-458E-8132-78FF0A2CF210>