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(). - 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/
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: [PATCH 3/5] lockstat: core infrastructure
- From: Daniel Walker <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 3/5] lockstat: core infrastructure
- From: Ingo Molnar <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 3/5] lockstat: core infrastructure
- References:
- [PATCH 0/5] lock contention tracking -v3
- From: Peter Zijlstra <[email protected]>
- [PATCH 3/5] lockstat: core infrastructure
- From: Peter Zijlstra <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 3/5] lockstat: core infrastructure
- From: Daniel Walker <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 3/5] lockstat: core infrastructure
- From: Ingo Molnar <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 3/5] lockstat: core infrastructure
- From: Steven Rostedt <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 3/5] lockstat: core infrastructure
- From: Ingo Molnar <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 3/5] lockstat: core infrastructure
- From: Daniel Walker <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 3/5] lockstat: core infrastructure
- From: Peter Zijlstra <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 3/5] lockstat: core infrastructure
- From: Daniel Walker <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 3/5] lockstat: core infrastructure
- From: Ingo Molnar <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 3/5] lockstat: core infrastructure
- From: Daniel Walker <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 3/5] lockstat: core infrastructure
- From: Peter Zijlstra <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 3/5] lockstat: core infrastructure
- From: Daniel Walker <[email protected]>
- [PATCH 0/5] lock contention tracking -v3
- Prev by Date: Re: Dependent CPU core speed reporting not updated with CPUFREQ_SHARED_TYPE_HW?
- Next by Date: Re: [PATCH 2.6.21 1/3] x86_64: EFI64 support
- Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH 3/5] lockstat: core infrastructure
- Next by thread: Re: [PATCH 3/5] lockstat: core infrastructure
- Index(es):