Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 1 Jun 2007 20:51:23 +0200 | From | Ingo Molnar <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 3/5] lockstat: core infrastructure |
| |
* Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl> wrote:
> On Fri, 2007-06-01 at 09:11 -0700, Daniel Walker wrote: > > On Fri, 2007-06-01 at 17:52 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > > The whole issue is that you don't have any control over what clocksource > > > you'll end up with. If it so happens that pmtimer gets selected your > > > whole box will crawl if its used liberaly, like the patch under > > > discussion does. > > > > You can have control over it, which I think the whole point of this > > discussion .. > > No you don't, clocksource will gladly discard the TSC when its not > found stable enough (the majority of the systems today). While it > would be good enough for sched_clock().
yeah, precisely. [ There is another thing as well: most embedded architectures do not even implement LOCKDEP_SUPPORT today, so it wouldnt be possible to enable lockstat on them anyway. So this whole topic is ridiculous to begin with. How about fixing some real, non-imaginery bugs instead? ;-) ]
Ingo - 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/
| |