![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
On Thu, 2004-03-18 at 00:51, Dominik Brodowski wrote: > On Wed, Mar 17, 2004 at 02:56:27PM -0800, Nate Lawson wrote: > > Instead of all this gymnastics, how about: > > It's not so much gymnastics -- implementing different handling for cpufreq > drivers which do not affect the TSC is easy. It's just difficult to get to > know what drivers/CPUs are affected... and the test run you did yesterday > helped in evaluating this. Thanks for doing so. > > > 1. If using Px states, state is unknown until first "set" event. > > Normally, when using cpufreq drivers the original state is known -- only the > ACPI spec has this severe flaw, but there are tries for a workaround [patch > is submitted] > > > 2. Implement priorities for time source selection and a generic timer API. > > This gets around the need to get the clock rate correct to have system > > timers work. On FreeBSD, this is /sys/kern/kern_tc.c > > IIRC, John Stultz intends to do a major upgrade of the timing code in 2.7. Well, we already have time source selection in 2.6 for i386. Most other arches have a single stable time source, so its not as critical for them. As for 2.7, a couple of holes have been poked in my initial design, so any major rewrite is somewhat on hold. Moving more arches to the more generic time_interpolator interface that ia64 uses may be the best solution, although its not as clean as I'd really like. thanks -john - 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/ | ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2005-03-22 13:01 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||