From: Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de>
To: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Daniel Walker <dwalker@mvista.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, johnstul@us.ibm.com,
tglx@linutronix.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH] i386 tsc: remove xtime_lock'ing around cpufreq notifier
Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2007 22:15:04 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200704122215.04499.ak@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <461E8CAA.3020902@goop.org>
> They could be huge differences - unbounded, in fact. It would make
> printk fairly hard to interpret, I would think. The only benefit to
> using sched_clock in printk is that if you're using it to work out the
> startup latencies you won't be confused by stolen time. But I think
> that's a fairly small benefit compared to the disadvantage of not being
> able to meaningfully compare the timestamps on two printk messages.
Ok so the right solution would be a separate printk_clock() that is
implemented as the native sched_clock() even on Xen/VMI. Should be a SMOP.
-Andi
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-04-12 20:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-04-11 16:29 [PATCH] i386 tsc: remove xtime_lock'ing around cpufreq notifier Daniel Walker
2007-04-11 20:31 ` Andrew Morton
2007-04-11 20:54 ` Daniel Walker
2007-04-11 21:33 ` Andrew Morton
2007-04-12 0:39 ` Andrew Morton
2007-04-12 9:36 ` Andi Kleen
2007-04-12 16:23 ` Andrew Morton
2007-04-12 16:45 ` Andi Kleen
2007-04-12 17:00 ` Andrew Morton
2007-04-12 17:43 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2007-04-12 17:46 ` Andi Kleen
2007-04-12 17:52 ` Daniel Walker
2007-04-12 17:55 ` Andrew Morton
2007-04-12 18:27 ` Andi Kleen
2007-04-12 19:41 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2007-04-12 19:43 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2007-04-12 17:41 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2007-04-12 17:45 ` Andi Kleen
2007-04-12 19:46 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2007-04-12 20:15 ` Andi Kleen [this message]
2007-04-12 17:17 ` Andi Kleen
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=200704122215.04499.ak@suse.de \
--to=ak@suse.de \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=dwalker@mvista.com \
--cc=jeremy@goop.org \
--cc=johnstul@us.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.