lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2005]   [Aug]   [26]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: Need better is_better_time_interpolator() algorithm
From
Date
On Fri, 2005-08-26 at 12:16 -0700, George Anzinger wrote:
> Alex Williamson wrote:
> > On Fri, 2005-08-26 at 08:39 -0700, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> >>1. If a system boots up with a single cpu then there is no question that
> >>the ITC/TSC should be used because of the fast access.
>
> We need to factor in frequency shifting here, especially if it happens
> with out notice.

Would we ever want to favor a frequency shifting timer over anything
else in the system? If it was noticeable perhaps we'd just need a
callback to re-evaluate the frequency and rescan for the best timer. If
it happens without notice, a flag that statically assigns it the lowest
priority will due. Or maybe if the driver factored the frequency
shifting into the drift it would make the timer undesirable without
resorting to flags. Thanks,

Alex

--
Alex Williamson HP Linux & Open Source Lab

-
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: 2005-08-26 21:29    [W:0.147 / U:0.288 seconds]
©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site