linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] All Transmeta CPUs have constant TSCs

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]

Date:	Mon, 8 Jan 2007 21:19:24 +0100 (MET)
From:	Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...ux01.gwdg.de>
To:	dean gaudet <dean@...tic.org>
cc:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, akpm@...l.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] All Transmeta CPUs have constant TSCs


On Jan 8 2007 00:02, dean gaudet wrote:
>On Fri, 5 Jan 2007, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
>> On Jan 4 2007 17:48, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>> >
>> >[i386] All Transmeta CPUs have constant TSCs
>> >All Transmeta CPUs ever produced have constant-rate TSCs.
>> 
>> A TSC is ticking according to the CPU frequency, is not it?
>
>transmeta decided years before intel and amd that a constant rate tsc 
>(unaffected by P-state) was the only sane choice.  on transmeta cpus the 
>tsc increments at the maximum cpu frequency no matter what the P-state 
>(and no matter what longrun is doing behind the kernel's back).
>
>mind you, many people thought this was a crazy choice at the time...
>
Well it defeats the purpose of TSC. I mean, they could have kept the "TSC" and
instead added a second TSC ticker, constant_tsc.


	-`J'
-- 
-
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/