[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.11.1601131443380.3575@nanos>
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2016 14:45:54 +0100 (CET)
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: Prarit Bhargava <prarit@...hat.com>
cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>,
Xunlei Pang <pang.xunlei@...aro.org>,
Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@...aro.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.cz>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
Peter Hurley <peter@...leysoftware.com>,
Vasily Averin <vvs@...tuozzo.com>,
Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] printk, Add printk.clock kernel parameter [v2]
On Wed, 13 Jan 2016, Prarit Bhargava wrote:
> This patchset introduces additional NMI safe timekeeping functions and the
> kernel parameter printk.clock=[local|boot|real|tai] allowing a
> user to specify an adjusted clock to use with printk timestamps. The
> hardware clock, or the existing functionality, is preserved by default.
You still fail to explain WHY we need a gazillion of different clocks
here.
What's the problem with using the fast monotonic clock instead of local_clock
and be done with it? I really don't see the point why we would need
boot/real/tai and all the extra churn in the fast clock.
Thanks,
tglx
Powered by blists - more mailing lists