[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080623205433.GA16579@elte.hu>
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2008 22:54:33 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Alok Kataria <akataria@...are.com>
Cc: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Daniel Hecht <dhecht@...are.com>, Tim Mann <mann@...are.com>,
Zach Amsden <zach@...are.com>, Sahil Rihan <srihan@...are.com>,
the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] x86:Use cpu_khz for loops_per_jiffy calculation
* Alok Kataria <akataria@...are.com> wrote:
> Ok, I have changed the printks to KERN_INFO.
>
> On X86 platform we can use the value of tsc_khz computed during tsc
> calibration to calculate the loops_per_jiffy value. Its very important
> to keep the error in lpj values to minimum as any error in that may
> result in kernel panic in check_timer. In virtualization environment,
> On a highly overloaded host the guest delay calibration may sometimes
> result in errors beyond the ~50% that timer_irq_works can handle,
> resulting in the guest panicking.
>
> Does some formating changes to lpj_setup code to now have a single
> printk to print the bogomips value.
>
> We do this only for the boot processor because the AP's can have
> different base frequencies or the BIOS might boot a AP at a different
> frequency.
applied to tip/x86/delay - thanks Alok.
could you check whether tip/master (which now includes your changes as
well) works as expected in your test environment? I had to do a conflict
resolution in tsc_32.c, i hope i got it right. You can pick it up via:
http://people.redhat.com/mingo/tip.git/README
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists