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
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2008 11:22:44 -0700 From: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org> To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> Cc: Dave Jones <davej@...emonkey.org.uk>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, cpufreq@...r.kernel.org, Alok Kataria <akataria@...are.com>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com> Subject: Re: [BUG] cpufreq: constant cpu_khz On Mon, 25 Aug 2008 19:57:12 +0200 Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> wrote: > > * Dave Jones <davej@...emonkey.org.uk> wrote: > > > > hm, that too is due to the tsc.c unification - Alok Cc:-ed. > > > Applied your fix to x86/urgent. > > > > ACKed-by: Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com> > > > > Good catch Peter. I'm puzzled how that bug was latent on 64bit for > > so long with no-one realising though. > > i think it's the combination of these two factors: > > - bootup frequently is typically full-speed, so we calibrate things > right > > - cpufreq events are relatively slow-scale - and when they trigger > the system is definitely not under load. So how precisely the > scheduler functions isnt all that important in such scenarios - > there's tons of CPU power available. > - many many of the 64 bit capable cpus are constant-tsc anyway -- 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