[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080624175753.GG5642@ucw.cz>
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2008 19:57:53 +0200
From: Pavel Machek <pavel@...e.cz>
To: Alok Kataria <akataria@...are.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
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>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] x86:Use cpu_khz for loops_per_jiffy calculation
Hi!
> 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.
How did you adress 'khz has nothing to do with loops per jiffie'
comment?
Some cpus can do loop in cycle , some need two cycles, some need half.
Pavel
> @@ -421,6 +422,10 @@
> return;
> }
>
> + lpj = ((u64)tsc_khz * 1000);
> + do_div(lpj, HZ);
> + lpj_tsc = lpj;
> +
> printk("Detected %lu.%03lu MHz processor.\n",
> (unsigned long)cpu_khz / 1000,
> (unsigned long)cpu_khz % 1000);
>
--
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
--
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