From 177996e6e20f15004d6757d9b859f57d181ef443 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt Date: Tue, 9 Jun 2009 21:12:00 +0000 Subject: powerpc: Don't do generic calibrate_delay() Currently we are wasting time calling the generic calibrate_delay() function. We don't need it since our implementation of __delay() is based on the CPU timebase. So instead, we use our own small implementation that initializes loops_per_jiffy to something sensible to make the few users like spinlock debug be happy Signed-off-by: Benjamin Herrenschmidt --- arch/powerpc/kernel/time.c | 10 ++++++++++ 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+) (limited to 'arch/powerpc/kernel/time.c') diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/time.c b/arch/powerpc/kernel/time.c index bee1443da763..15391c2ab013 100644 --- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/time.c +++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/time.c @@ -52,6 +52,7 @@ #include #include #include +#include #include #include @@ -1143,6 +1144,15 @@ void div128_by_32(u64 dividend_high, u64 dividend_low, } +/* We don't need to calibrate delay, we use the CPU timebase for that */ +void calibrate_delay(void) +{ + /* Some generic code (such as spinlock debug) use loops_per_jiffy + * as the number of __delay(1) in a jiffy, so make it so + */ + loops_per_jiffy = tb_ticks_per_jiffy; +} + static int __init rtc_init(void) { struct platform_device *pdev; -- cgit v1.2.3