[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170517150302.GI4156@localhost>
Date: Wed, 17 May 2017 17:03:02 +0200
From: Miroslav Lichvar <mlichvar@...hat.com>
To: John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>,
Prarit Bhargava <prarit@...hat.com>,
Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@...hat.com>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
Anton Blanchard <anton@...ba.org>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] timekeeping: Improved NOHZ frequency steering (v2)
On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 10:26:12AM -0700, John Stultz wrote:
> On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 8:14 AM, Miroslav Lichvar <mlichvar@...hat.com> wrote:
> > I see this with real PHCs and PTP/NTP synchronization too. It's very
> > confusing when the timekeeping changes so much for no apparent reason.
> > If we can't remove the old vsyscalls yet, I was thinking maybe a new
> > flag could be added to adjtimex to report the error, so applications
> > can at least detect this problem and consider stepping the clock in
> > order to reset the error?
> >
> > Thoughts?
>
> I'd rather not have short-term hacks that applications have to adapt.
> So I think we should drop the old vsyscall method in the near term.
> Sorry this sort of fell off my radar.
Ok. Sounds good.
> Do you have an updated set of patches you want to get ready to address
> the issue? We can get those reviewed while we increase the pressure on
> dropping the OLD_VSYSCALL implementations.
I'll send an RFC series shortly.
Thanks,
--
Miroslav Lichvar
Powered by blists - more mailing lists