From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Zachary Amsden <zamsden@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4: kvm 1/4] Code motion.  Separate timer intialization
 into an indepedent function.
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2009 05:51:29 -1000
Message-ID: <4AC37E81.8080104@redhat.com>
References: <4AC1C59F.6010703@redhat.com> <1254260317-3490-1-git-send-email-zamsden@redhat.com> <4AC31AA5.4060609@redhat.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com>
To: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
Return-path: <linux-kernel-owner+glk-linux-kernel-3=40m.gmane.org-S1754790AbZI3Pxm@vger.kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <4AC31AA5.4060609@redhat.com>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org

On 09/29/2009 10:45 PM, Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 09/29/2009 11:38 PM, Zachary Amsden wrote:
>> Signed-off-by: Zachary Amsden<zamsden@redhat.com>
>
>
> Looks good.
>
> Is anything preventing us from unifying the constant_tsc and !same 
> paths?  We could just do a quick check in the notifier, see the tsc 
> frequency hasn't changed, and return.

Actually, yes.  On constant_tsc processors, the processor frequency may 
still change, however the TSC frequency does not change with it.

I actually have both of these kinds of processors (freq changes with 
constant TSC and freq changes with variable TSC) so I was able to test 
both of these cases.

Zach