lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Dec]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [more markup]  [less markup]  [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
DateMon, 10 Dec 2007 23:45:08 +0100
FromIngo Molnar <>
SubjectRe: 2.6.24-rc4-git5: Reported regressions from 2.6.23
* Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> wrote:

> > what do you think? Right now i've got them queued up for 2.6.25 in 
> > both the scheduler-devel and the x86-devel git trees - but can 
> > submit them for 2.6.24 if it's better if we did them there. I've got 
> > no strong opinion either way.
> 
> printk_clock() doesn't seem terribly important but what's this stuff 
> about effects on udelay/mdelay?  That can be serious if they're 
> getting shortened.

since udelay depends on loops_per_jiffy, which is fixed up 
time_cpufreq_notifier(), i dont see how it could be affected by 
frequency changes. (but that's the theory - practice might be different)

	Ingo


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2007-12-10 23:47    [from the cache]
©2003-2008