Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 09 Nov 2002 08:34:32 -0800 | From | "Martin J. Bligh" <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH][2.5] notsc option needs some attention/TLC |
| |
>> If we configure for "I have a TSC, period" you add the option >> to disable it, which nullifies any benefit of the config option >> in the first place since we can't assume TSC presence any more. >> If we don't configure for TSC, you force tsc_disable, which means >> that a generic kernel _can't_ use the TSC. > > 2.4 was modified to printk a message that TSC was not disabled. This > does confuse people
Having this config option ass-backwards is mind-bogglingly confusing, and there seems no real reason for it. John had a plan to just put in CONFIG_X86_PIT instead as the inverse of this, and delete CONFIG_X86_TSC. He seems to have gone off this idea for some reason I can't understand ... I think it solves a lot of these issues ...
Having a config option called TSC that in fact has nothing to directly do with the TSC, but disables the PIT seems silly. The first time I read all this code I spend quite a while thinking it was all the incorrect, and the wrong way around ... things should be more intuitive than that.
M. - 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/
| |