[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090526084455.672c652f@dhcp-lab-109.englab.brq.redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 26 May 2009 08:44:55 +0200
From: Stanislaw Gruszka <sgruszka@...hat.com>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
linuxppc-dev@...abs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH resend4 2/3] itimers: fix periodic tics precision
On Mon, 25 May 2009 14:51:32 +0200
Stanislaw Gruszka <sgruszka@...hat.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 25 May 2009 14:32:14 +0200 (CEST)
> Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 25 May 2009, Stanislaw Gruszka wrote:
> > > @@ -904,6 +905,7 @@ void __init time_init(void)
> > > tb_ticks_per_usec = ppc_tb_freq / 1000000;
> > > tb_to_us = mulhwu_scale_factor(ppc_tb_freq, 1000000);
> > > calc_cputime_factors();
> > > + cputime_one = jiffies_to_cputime(1);
> >
> > 1) The variable name is misleading.
>
> What about cputime_one_jiffy ?
>
> > 2) The patch breaks all powerpc platforms which have
> > CONFIG_VIRT_CPU_ACCOUNTING=n and ia64 with
> > CONFIG_VIRT_CPU_ACCOUNTING=y
>
> Stupid me, in asm-generic/cputime.h should be
> #define cputime_one jiffies_to_cputime(1)
Hmmm, I'm confused. Perhaps I missed something, but I think patch was ok.
For powerpc and ia64 and CONFIG_VIRT_CPU_ACCOUNTING=n definitions from
asm-generic/cputime.h where used. In this file was:
#define cputime_one (1UL)
and that correct as jiffies_to_cputime(x) is just (x)
For CONFIG_VIRT_CPU_ACCOUTING=y:
- For powerpc additional variable was declared and computed in
initialization time. Declaration of was in __KERENEL__ scope.
- For ia64: cputime_one was defined as jiffies_to_cputime(1)
Anyway I didn't try to even compile the patch on other architectures than x86.
Of cource I will test my patch, but first I would like to know what You think?
Does we really need such optimization (because before usage of
jiffies_to_cputime(1) was just fine) ?
Cheers
Stanislaw
--
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