Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: Voyager subarchitecture for 2.5.46 | From | Alan Cox <> | Date | 06 Nov 2002 15:38:35 +0000 |
| |
On Wed, 2002-11-06 at 15:03, J.E.J. Bottomley wrote: > There are certain architectures (voyager is the only one currently supported, > but I suspect the Numa machines will have this too) where the TSC cannot be > used for cross CPU timings because the processors are driven by separate > clocks and may even have different clock speeds.
IBM Summit is indeed another one.
> What I need is an option simply not to compile in the TSC code and use the PIT > instead. What I'm trying to do with the TSC and PIT options is give three > choices: > > 1. Don't use TSC (don't compile TSC code): X86_TSC=n, X86_PIT=y > > 2. May use TSC but check first (blacklist, notsc kernel option). X86_TSC=y, > X86_PIT=y > > 3. TSC is always OK so don't need PIT. X86_TSC=y, X86_PIT=n
[Plus we need X86_CYCLONE and we may need X86_SOMETHING else for some pending stuff]
> We probably need to make the notsc and dodgy tsc check contingent on X86_PIT > (or a config option that says we have some other timer mechanism compiled in). > Really, the options should probably be handled in timer.c.
The dodgy_tsc check is now obsolete. The known cases are handled with workarounds and CS5510/20 can now use the TSC
> Do we have an option for a deferred panic that will trip just after we init > the console and clean out the printk buffer?
Point to timer_none, check that later on in the boot
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |