[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180626150703.GC2458@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2018 17:07:03 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Pavel Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@...cle.com>
Cc: steven.sistare@...cle.com, daniel.m.jordan@...cle.com,
linux@...linux.org.uk, schwidefsky@...ibm.com,
heiko.carstens@...ibm.com, john.stultz@...aro.org,
sboyd@...eaurora.org, x86@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
mingo@...hat.com, tglx@...utronix.de, hpa@...or.com,
douly.fnst@...fujitsu.com, prarit@...hat.com, feng.tang@...el.com,
pmladek@...e.com, gnomes@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk,
linux-s390@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v12 10/11] sched: early boot clock
On Tue, Jun 26, 2018 at 07:27:05AM -0400, Pavel Tatashin wrote:
> We start getting timer interrupts. Is it acceptable to move
> sched_clock_init() after late_time_init()?
After much puzzling and cursing, yes, I suppose that'll work.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists