linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 01/10] -mm: clocksource: increase initcall priority

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <877izcorvr.fsf@duaron.myhome.or.jp>
Date:	Sun, 08 Oct 2006 04:19:52 +0900
From:	OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@...l.parknet.co.jp>
To:	Daniel Walker <dwalker@...sta.com>
Cc:	akpm@...l.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, johnstul@...ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/10] -mm: clocksource: increase initcall priority

Daniel Walker <dwalker@...sta.com> writes:

> On Sun, 2006-10-08 at 03:41 +0900, OGAWA Hirofumi wrote:
>
>> >>> 
>> >>> We'll need to change it.
>> >>
>> >> We can add a call to clocksource_rating_change() inside
>> >> acpi_pm_need_workaround(), are there deeper dependencies?
>> >
>> > There is no deeper dependencies.  If it's meaning
>> > clocksource_reselect() in current git, it sounds good to me.
>> 
>> Ah, I was forgetting why I didn't before. If it's a buggy pmtmr, we'll
>> get corrupted time until re-selecting the clocksource.
>> 
>> If anybody doesn't care this will be good with it. If not, we would
>> need to back to old one. IIRC, John did it.
>
> We could just reverse it, use the verified read function until we know
> it's a good PM timer, then switch to the faster read function.

Yes, we did it in old timer code.
-- 
OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@...l.parknet.co.jp>
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/