From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Arnd Bergmann Subject: Re: [RFC] remove bogus CLOCK_TICK_RATE definitions Date: Thu, 14 May 2009 01:12:59 +0200 Message-ID: <200905140113.00018.arnd@arndb.de> References: <200905131548.14883.arnd@arndb.de> <18955.20578.972820.752249@cargo.ozlabs.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de ([212.227.126.186]:62870 "EHLO moutng.kundenserver.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1761842AbZEMXNG (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 May 2009 19:13:06 -0400 In-Reply-To: <18955.20578.972820.752249@cargo.ozlabs.ibm.com> Content-Disposition: inline Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Paul Mackerras Cc: linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, tglx@linutronix.de, Alan Cox On Thursday 14 May 2009, Paul Mackerras wrote: > Arnd Bergmann writes: > > > PowerPC actually has a number of different time base values > > per architecture, but maybe 1024000 is a common divisor for > > all of them. > > It was more that 1024000 is a multiple of all the common HZ values. I guess in that case powerpc falls into the same category as ia64, i.e. it makes up a value to keep ACT_HZ from being harmful, rather than using ACT_HZ for something helpful. We should consequently drop the powerpc definition along with the other bogus ones. This will also help the theoretical CONFIG_HZ=300 case. Arnd <><