From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner+willy=40w.ods.org-S932227AbVHKCcr@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S932227AbVHKCcr (ORCPT <rfc822;willy@w.ods.org>);
	Wed, 10 Aug 2005 22:32:47 -0400
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932228AbVHKCcq
	(ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel-outgoing>);
	Wed, 10 Aug 2005 22:32:46 -0400
Received: from mustang.oldcity.dca.net ([216.158.38.3]:3461 "HELO
	mustang.oldcity.dca.net") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP
	id S932227AbVHKCcq (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Wed, 10 Aug 2005 22:32:46 -0400
Subject: Re: [RFC - 0/9] Generic timekeeping subsystem  (v. B5)
From: Lee Revell <rlrevell@joe-job.com>
To: john stultz <johnstul@us.ibm.com>
Cc: lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, George Anzinger <george@mvista.com>,
       frank@tuxrocks.com, Anton Blanchard <anton@samba.org>,
       benh@kernel.crashing.org, Nishanth Aravamudan <nacc@us.ibm.com>,
       Roman Zippel <zippel@linux-m68k.org>,
       Ulrich Windl <ulrich.windl@rz.uni-regensburg.de>
In-Reply-To: <1123726394.32531.33.camel@cog.beaverton.ibm.com>
References: <1123723279.30963.267.camel@cog.beaverton.ibm.com>
	 <1123726394.32531.33.camel@cog.beaverton.ibm.com>
Content-Type: text/plain
Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2005 22:32:40 -0400
Message-Id: <1123727560.30850.1.camel@mindpipe>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Evolution 2.2.0 
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Wed, 2005-08-10 at 19:13 -0700, john stultz wrote:
> All,
> 	Here's the next rev in my rework of the current timekeeping subsystem.
> No major changes, only some cleanups and further splitting the larger
> patches into smaller ones.

Last I heard this made gettimeofday() 20% slower on x86.  Is this still
the case?

Lee