linux-kernel - Re: [patch] i386, numaq: enable TSCs again

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: <20070525083153.GA27236@elte.hu>
Date:	Fri, 25 May 2007 10:31:53 +0200
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	William Lee Irwin III <wli@...omorphy.com>
Cc:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
	Satyam Sharma <satyam.sharma@...il.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
Subject: Re: [patch] i386, numaq: enable TSCs again


* William Lee Irwin III <wli@...omorphy.com> wrote:

> > Andi, Andrew, do you remember why we disabled TSCs on NUMAQ? It was 
> > slightly async between CPUs, right? In that case we should try the 
> > patch below.
> 
> I remember. It was far beyond "slightly async;" they would drift 
> minutes apart during reasonable amounts of uptime, though it would 
> take at least several days to drift so far (I don't recall how long it 
> took).

yes, that's what i meant under 'slightly async'. Some AMD CPUs are like 
that too and sched_clock() now handles that fine. So we should try my 
patch.

	Ingo
-
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/