From: john stultz <johnstul@us.ibm.com>
To: Christoph Lameter <clameter@engr.sgi.com>
Cc: David Mosberger <davidm@hpl.hp.com>,
lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Tim Schmielau <tim@physik3.uni-rostock.de>,
George Anzinger <george@mvista.com>,
albert@users.sourceforge.net,
Ulrich Windl <ulrich.windl@rz.uni-regensburg.de>,
Dominik Brodowski <linux@dominikbrodowski.de>,
Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de>,
paulus@samba.org, schwidefsky@de.ibm.com,
keith maanthey <kmannth@us.ibm.com>,
Chris McDermott <lcm@us.ibm.com>, Max Asbock <masbock@us.ibm.com>,
mahuja@us.ibm.com, Nishanth Aravamudan <nacc@us.ibm.com>,
Darren Hart <darren@dvhart.com>,
"Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@us.ibm.com>,
Anton Blanchard <anton@samba.org>,
donf@us.ibm.com, mpm@selenic.com, benh@kernel.crashing.org,
linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: IA64 implementation of timesource for new time of day subsystem
Date: Mon, 16 May 2005 20:53:44 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1116276824.13867.15.camel@cog.beaverton.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.62.0505161325330.2509@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com>
On Mon, 2005-05-16 at 13:27 -0700, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Mon, 16 May 2005, john stultz wrote:
>
> >
> > No. I intend to preserve the existing functionality (and performance) of
> > the current code. The current timeofday core should allow for this (as I
> > described in my last mail), so really its just a matter of either me or
> > someone else getting around to properly converting that arch with the
> > help of the arch maintainer. Until the arch is really ready to use the
> > new timeofday core, no changes are necessary.
>
> Its not an arch specific issue. The time sources need to have a field that
> specifies that jitter protection is needed and there needs to be some
> logic to implement it. Otherwise we have to develop special functions for
> each timesource that deal with jitter protection.
You've only pointed out two timesources that could want this (ITC and
TSC), so I think its reasonable to do your jitter handling in the
timesource driver. If there are other arches that have non hardware
synced per-cpu counters, then it would be something to consider.
> Function will make a
> fastcall for the clocks that use jitter protection not possible and thus
> timer access will slow down.
I disagree. I already explained how this can be done via the
arch_update_vsyscall_gtod() interface by special casing for this
specific well known time source.
> > What I'm trying to shake out, with Christoph's help, is any major
> > limitations in the core timeofday code that would keep an arch from
> > being able to use it. I feel Christoph's concerns have been addressed,
> > but please let me know if you disagree.
>
> Please add jitter protection to the arch independent code.
If more timesources need that functionality, then I'll be happy to.
Until then it should stay in the ia64 specific itc driver and fastcall
code.
thanks
-john
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-05-16 20:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <1116029796.26454.2.camel@cog.beaverton.ibm.com>
[not found] ` <1116029872.26454.4.camel@cog.beaverton.ibm.com>
[not found] ` <1116029971.26454.7.camel@cog.beaverton.ibm.com>
[not found] ` <1116030058.26454.10.camel@cog.beaverton.ibm.com>
[not found] ` <1116030139.26454.13.camel@cog.beaverton.ibm.com>
2005-05-14 19:55 ` IA64 implementation of timesource for new time of day subsystem Christoph Lameter
2005-05-15 9:12 ` James Courtier-Dutton
2005-05-15 10:17 ` Andi Kleen
2005-05-16 15:30 ` Chris Friesen
2005-05-16 17:34 ` john stultz
2005-05-16 18:09 ` Christoph Lameter
2005-05-16 18:45 ` john stultz
2005-05-16 18:55 ` john stultz
2005-05-16 19:24 ` Christoph Lameter
2005-05-16 19:29 ` David Mosberger
2005-05-16 19:50 ` john stultz
2005-05-16 20:27 ` Christoph Lameter
2005-05-16 20:53 ` john stultz [this message]
2005-05-16 20:58 ` David Mosberger
2005-05-16 21:35 ` john stultz
2005-05-16 21:53 ` Christoph Lameter
2005-05-17 8:05 ` Ulrich Windl
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=1116276824.13867.15.camel@cog.beaverton.ibm.com \
--to=johnstul@us.ibm.com \
--cc=ak@suse.de \
--cc=albert@users.sourceforge.net \
--cc=anton@samba.org \
--cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=clameter@engr.sgi.com \
--cc=darren@dvhart.com \
--cc=davidm@hpl.hp.com \
--cc=djwong@us.ibm.com \
--cc=donf@us.ibm.com \
--cc=george@mvista.com \
--cc=kmannth@us.ibm.com \
--cc=lcm@us.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@dominikbrodowski.de \
--cc=mahuja@us.ibm.com \
--cc=masbock@us.ibm.com \
--cc=mpm@selenic.com \
--cc=nacc@us.ibm.com \
--cc=paulus@samba.org \
--cc=schwidefsky@de.ibm.com \
--cc=tim@physik3.uni-rostock.de \
--cc=ulrich.windl@rz.uni-regensburg.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox