[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2007 13:54:44 +0100
From: Keir Fraser <keir@...source.com>
To: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@...ell.com>, Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>
CC: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>,
Xen-devel <xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Chris Wright <chrisw@...s-sol.org>,
<virtualization@...ts.osdl.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [patch 14/33] xen: xen time implementation
On 6/6/07 13:46, "Jan Beulich" <jbeulich@...ell.com> wrote:
>> On the other hand some timing issues on throttling are probably
>> the smallest of the users' problems when it really happens.
>
> Not if this results in your box hanging - I think throttling is exactly
> intended
> to keep the box alive as long as possible (and I've seen throttling in action,
> with the box happily recovering from the situation - after having seen it a
> few times I checked and found the fan covered with dust).
Clamping to last returned timestamp value would be fine here. Time would go
moderately haywire for a while (lurch forwards and then stop for a while),
but wouldn't go backwards and should recover reasonably within the timescale
of the thermal event itself. I don't see an issue with just implementing
this clamping if it is needed.
-- Keir
-
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists