[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130121224900.GB23505@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2013 22:49:00 +0000
From: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>
To: John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>
Cc: Matt Sealey <matt@...esi-usa.com>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Linux ARM Kernel ML <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: One of these things (CONFIG_HZ) is not like the others..
On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 02:36:13PM -0800, John Stultz wrote:
> Well, Russell brought up a case that doesn't handle this. If a system
> *can't* do HZ=100, but can do HZ=200.
>
> Though there are hacks, of course, that might get around this (skip
> every other interrupt at 200HZ).
Note: in the early days of EBSA110 support, yes, we did that, so that
we could have HZ=100 everywhere. _However_ it sufficiently peturbed
NTP that it basically was unable to slew the clock in any sane manner.
I never got to the bottom of why that was, and when USER_HZ was
decoupled from the kernel HZ, it allowed the problem to be fixed, and
the kernel code to become a _lot_ cleaner.
--
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