From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Gleixner Subject: Re: [patch] ACPI: Keep TSC stable, when lapic_timer_c2_ok is set Date: Thu, 10 May 2007 22:50:56 +0200 Message-ID: <1178830256.22481.1.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1178555611.3042.13.camel@localhost.localdomain> <200705100409.37753.lenb@kernel.org> Reply-To: tglx@linutronix.de Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from www.osadl.org ([213.239.205.134]:38603 "EHLO mail.tglx.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753148AbXEJUsD (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 May 2007 16:48:03 -0400 In-Reply-To: <200705100409.37753.lenb@kernel.org> Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org To: Len Brown Cc: Andi Kleen , linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org > Note, however, that the assumption that the TSC and the LAPIC > timer breaking under the same conditions will not always > be true going forward. > > In particular, there will be systems with a fully functional TSC > and a broken LAPIC timer. But I guess we'll cross that bridge > when we come to it... Sigh, is there any kind of breakage which is not invented yet ? I guess we need to have a seperate option for the TSC vs. C2 then. tglx