Messages in this thread | | | From | "H. Peter Anvin" <> | Subject | Re: Voyager subarchitecture for 2.5.46 | Date | 6 Nov 2002 14:36:32 -0800 |
| |
Followup to: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0211060729210.2393-100000@home.transmeta.com> By author: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@transmeta.com> In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel > > I disagree. > > We should use the TSC everywhere (if it exists, of course), and the fact > that two CPU's don't run synchronized shouldn't matter. >
If it exists, and works :-/
> It's clearly stupid in the long run to depend on the TSC synchronization. > We should consider different CPU's to be different clock-domains, and just > synchronize them using the primitives we already have (hey, people can use > ntp to synchronize over networks quite well, and that's without the kind > of synchronization primitives that we have within the same box).
Synchronizing them is nice, since it makes RDTSC usable in user space (without nodelocking.) If it ain't doable, then it ain't.
-hpa -- <hpa@transmeta.com> at work, <hpa@zytor.com> in private! "Unix gives you enough rope to shoot yourself in the foot." http://www.zytor.com/~hpa/puzzle.txt <amsp@zytor.com> - 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/
| |