[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1403121722030.18573@ionos.tec.linutronix.de>
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2014 17:23:44 +0100 (CET)
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: joeyli <jlee@...e.com>
cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
Julian Wollrath <jwollrath@....de>, x86@...nel.org,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Subject: Re: [RESEND] Fast TSC calibration fails with v3.14-rc1 and later
On Wed, 12 Mar 2014, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Wed, 12 Mar 2014, joeyli wrote:
> > I think maybe still using ACPI_FADT_NO_CMOS_RTC to check does
> > acpi_early_init() need run before timekeeping_init().
> > If there have any future machine that applied ACPI TAD but "Fast TSC
> > calibration" fail, at least the alternate TSC calibration can work
> > around issue.
>
> Well, it can work around, but it sucks as it's way slower than the
> fast one. And we really don't want to pay that price for some half
> baken ACPI nonsense.
>
> Why exactly do you need that ACPI stuff before timekeeping_init()?
According to the changelog:
And, we want accessing ACPI TAD device to set system clock, so move
acpi_early_init() before timekeeping_init(). This final position is
also before efi_enter_virtual_mode().
Why do we need to access that TAD thing (whatever newfangled that is)
at this point?
Thanks,
tglx
--
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