[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CALCETrV2AMXZON5N0cvXeP=KAL-q-tDeuAGD10DtR4miLteE8w@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 2 Jun 2015 12:41:27 -0700
From: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] x86, tsc: Allow for high latency in quick_pit_calibrate()
On Tue, Jun 2, 2015 at 12:33 PM, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> wrote:
> On Thu, 21 May 2015, Adrian Hunter wrote:
>
>> If it takes longer than 12us to read the PIT counter lsb/msb,
>> then the error margin will never fall below 500ppm within 50ms,
>> and Fast TSC calibration will always fail.
>
> So finally the legacy PIT emulation takes longer than the 30 years old
> hardware implementation. Progress!
>
>> This patch detects when that will happen and switches to using
>> a slightly different algorithm that takes advantage of the PIT's
>> latch comand.
>
> Is there really no smarter way to figure out the TSC frequency on
> modern systems?
I just asked Len this question yesterday. intel_pstate can do it,
although the algorithm is a bit gross.
--Andy
>
> Thanks,
>
> tglx
--
Andy Lutomirski
AMA Capital Management, LLC
--
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