From: David Mosberger <davidm@napali.hpl.hp.com>
To: linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Linux-ia64] gettimeoffset for 2.5.67
Date: Mon, 12 May 2003 23:40:11 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <marc-linux-ia64-105590723705740@msgid-missing> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <marc-linux-ia64-105590723705684@msgid-missing>
>>>>> On 11 May 2003 13:54:29 -0400, Jes Sorensen <jes@wildopensource.com> said:
>>>>> "David" = David Mosberger <davidm@napali.hpl.hp.com> writes:
>>>>> On Thu, 8 May 2003 12:44:47 -0400, Jes Sorensen <jes@wildopensource.com> said:
Jes> I have added the check to fsys.S so for now we will stick to
Jes> the slow version for SN2, but I may look into fixing it to use
Jes> the fast syscalls for that at a later point. But lets get the
Jes> kernel booting first ... details, details ;-)
Jes> diff -urN -X /home/jes/exclude-linux linux-2.5.69-030509-vanilla/arch/ia64/kernel/fsys.S linux-2.5.69-030509/arch/ia64/kernel/fsys.S
Jes> --- linux-2.5.69-030509-vanilla/arch/ia64/kernel/fsys.S Sun May 4 19:52:48 2003
Jes> +++ linux-2.5.69-030509/arch/ia64/kernel/fsys.S Sun May 11 13:19:24 2003
Jes> @@ -142,21 +142,31 @@
Jes> * we ought to either skip the ITC-based interpolation or run an ntp-like
Jes> * daemon to keep the ITCs from drifting too far apart.
Jes> */
Jes> +
Jes> +#define IA64_SAL_PLATFORM_FEATURE_ITC_DRIFT (1 << 3)
Jes> +
This is not good. The definition is already in sal.h. Please lets
fix sal.h instead so it can be included by assembly code (i.e., change
sal.h so that the #define's come first, then check for #ifndef
__ASSEMBLY__". Also, what's the impact of adding the the extra check
to the fsys_gettimeofday()? Did you verify that the resulting
bundling is still near optimal?
Also, (not in reference to this particular patch): when you send code
that calls through a function pointer, I'd really like to see the
dereferencing there (for anything that goes in arch/ia64 or
include/asm-ia64, I mean). I know some kernel folks feel differently
about this, but it's very misleading to write:
foo(...);
instead of
(*foo)(...);
The former cannot reasonably fail (in the absence of weak symbols),
whereas the latter certainly can (and usually seems to... ;-).
Thanks,
--david
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-05-12 23:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-05-08 16:44 [Linux-ia64] gettimeoffset for 2.5.67 Jes Sorensen
2003-05-08 22:24 ` David Mosberger
2003-05-11 17:54 ` Jes Sorensen
2003-05-12 23:40 ` David Mosberger [this message]
2003-05-13 2:05 ` Jes Sorensen
2003-05-13 6:44 ` David Mosberger
2003-05-13 15:42 ` Jes Sorensen
2003-05-13 17:54 ` David Mosberger
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=marc-linux-ia64-105590723705740@msgid-missing \
--to=davidm@napali.hpl.hp.com \
--cc=linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org \
/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