On Fri, 2005-06-03 at 12:02 -0700, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Fri, 3 Jun 2005, john stultz wrote:
>
> > How about something like this?
> >
> > 300 TSC
> > 200 HPET
> > 200 CYCLONE
> > 100 ACPI
> > 050 PIT
> > 010 JIFFIES
> >
> > Then if the system has TSC issues (unsynced, cpufreq problems, etc), we
> > can demote the TSC's priority to 50 and it will fall back nicely without
> > manual intervention.
>
> Oh, we are going to have flags for timesources? Then please also do the
> jitter thing.
Huh? There are no flags here, just the priority values that are already
in the structure. When TSC timesource driver itself notes a problem
with the system, it can lower its own priority value.
thanks
-john
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
