linux-kernel - Re: [patch 13/19] GTOD: Mark TSC unusable for highres timers

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: <45549E0E.6090901@nortel.com>
Date:	Fri, 10 Nov 2006 09:43:10 -0600
From:	"Chris Friesen" <cfriesen@...tel.com>
To:	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
CC:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>,
	tglx@...utronix.de, Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>,
	john stultz <johnstul@...ibm.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>,
	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
	Roman Zippel <zippel@...ux-m68k.org>
Subject: Re: [patch 13/19] GTOD: Mark TSC unusable for highres timers

Alan Cox wrote:
> Ar Gwe, 2006-11-10 am 09:57 +0100, ysgrifennodd Ingo Molnar:

>>We should wait until CPU makers get their act together and implement a 
>>TSC variant that is /architecturally promised/ to have constant 
>>frequency (system bus frequency or whatever) and which never stops.
> 
> This will never happen for the really big boxes, light is just too
> slow... Our current TSC handling is not perfect but the TSC is often
> quite usable.

This hypothetical clock wouldn't have to run full speed, would it?  You 
could have a 1MHz clock distributed across even a large system fairly 
easily.

Wouldn't that be good enough?

Chris

-
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/