[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5191033E.2000303@codeaurora.org>
Date: Mon, 13 May 2013 11:14:06 -0400
From: Christopher Covington <cov@...eaurora.org>
To: Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>
CC: Marc Zyngier <Marc.Zyngier@....com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] ARM: Remove any correlation between IPC and BogoMips
value
Hi Will,
On 05/08/2013 05:06 AM, Will Deacon wrote:
> Hello Christopher,
>
> On Tue, May 07, 2013 at 04:48:26PM +0100, Christopher Covington wrote:
>> On 05/07/2013 05:08 AM, Will Deacon wrote:
>>> That seems like a lot of effort in order to preserve something that isn't
>>> even meaningful. We might be better just zeroing the value, but then we'll
>>> inevitably get bug reports of it being `wrong'.
>>
>> If I were in to filing bug reports about bogomips values, I would be just as
>> likely to do it for 1, 10000, 99999, and get_random_bytes(...) as for 0.
>
> That's a fair point, and one of the reasons I posted this as an RFC. I'd
> basically like an `obviously bogus' value so that people don't think `hey,
> my CPU sure it slow' and instead think `looks like this really is a bogus
> value after all'.
>
> However, you're probably right that there isn't a number which can convey
> that information properly, so how about we just put a string in there along
> the lines of "not reported" and leave it at that?
That sounds reasonable to me.
Christopher
--
Employee of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
hosted by the Linux Foundation.
--
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