Re: [patch 00/46] High resolution timer / dynamic tick update

[Daniel Walker]

On Wed, 2007-01-24 at 20:38 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Daniel Walker <dwalker@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> > > you are also misunderstanding the change. While the TSC is the only 
> > > unstable clocksource right now, the previous code tied the TSC to 
> > > the >pm-timer< clocksource. This change makes it generic, hence the 
> > > TSC can be verified by a hpet-only system (no pm-timer) as well. 
> > > Systems without a pm-timer and with a TSC are quite common. So it 
> > > solves a real problem.
> > 
> > Using my patch set a TSC specific watchdog could be created that isn't 
> > tied a another specific clock. [...]
> 
> in other words: Thomas was right with his approach and your criticism 
> against the generic code was unjustified. (I agree with the other points 
> of Thomas as well, so i'm going with his patchset for now.)

I think his approach was wrong that's why I'm resistant to his
implementation .. However, if he _demands_ to verify the TSC my patchset
provides the functionality to allow him to do it in a _clean_ manner
which meets the constraints that you and he have provided.

Daniel

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/