[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <AANLkTim27c_pHpawoGw3VyV9qQAF_8twJPTr5kqt6jhW@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2010 19:05:15 -0500
From: Andrew Lutomirski <luto@....edu>
To: john stultz <johnstul@...ibm.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
pc@...ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Improve clocksource unstable warning
On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 7:58 PM, john stultz <johnstul@...ibm.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 2010-11-13 at 00:22 +0000, john stultz wrote:
>> On Fri, 2010-11-12 at 18:51 -0500, Andrew Lutomirski wrote:
>> > Also wrong if cs_elapsed is just slightly less than wd_wrapping_time
>> > but the wd clocksource runs enough faster that it wrapped.
>>
>> Ok. Good point, that's a problem. Hrmmmm. Too much math for Friday. :)
>
> I have a hard time leaving things alone. :)
>
> So this still has the issue of the u64%u64 won't work on 32bit systems,
> but I think once I rework the modulo bit the following should be what
> you were describing.
>
> It is ugly, so let me know if you have a cleaner way.
>
I'm playing with this stuff now, and it looks like my (invariant,
constant, single-package i7) TSC has a max_idle_ns of just over 3
seconds. I'm confused.
--Andy
--
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