From: john stultz <johnstul@us.ibm.com>
To: Roman Zippel <zippel@linux-m68k.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch] hrtimer: round up relative start time on low-res arches
Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2006 12:43:54 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1140036234.27720.8.camel@leatherman> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.61.0602151259270.30994@scrub.home>
On Wed, 2006-02-15 at 13:26 +0100, Roman Zippel wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, 15 Feb 2006, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> > yeah, agreed. That will be accurately fixed via GTOD's per-hwclock
> > resolution values. It will have another advantage as well: e.g. the
> > whole of m68k wont be penalized via CONFIG_TIME_LOW_RES for having a
> > handful of sub-arches (Apollo, Sun3x, Q40) that dont have a higher
> > resolution timer - every clock can define its own resolution. You could
> > help that effort by porting m68k to use GTOD ;-)
>
> I'll do that as soon as the perfomance is equal or better than what we
> have right now and expensive 64bit math in the fast path, where it's
> provably a waste, is not exactly encouraging. I already provided all the
> math and code to keep it cheap and (relatively) simple, but I don't have
> the time to work constantly on it, so if you'd help to integrate it into
> John's work it would go a lot faster.
Hey Roman,
I just wanted to make sure you know I'm not ignoring your suggestions.
I do appreciate the time you have spent, and I have been continuing to
work on implementing your idea. Unfortunately the code is not trivial
and very much hurts the readability. I expect thats a sacrifice that
will be necessary, but hopefully after some review cycles we'll be able
to come to something we both like.
I'm hoping to have a first pass patch I can mail this week.
thanks
-john
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-02-15 19:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-02-13 1:09 [PATCH 01/13] hrtimer: round up relative start time Roman Zippel
2006-02-13 10:52 ` Thomas Gleixner
2006-02-13 11:25 ` Roman Zippel
2006-02-13 13:01 ` Ingo Molnar
2006-02-13 13:42 ` Roman Zippel
2006-02-13 14:44 ` Ingo Molnar
2006-02-13 15:49 ` Roman Zippel
2006-02-13 19:55 ` Ingo Molnar
2006-02-13 22:29 ` Roman Zippel
2006-02-14 7:41 ` Ingo Molnar
2006-02-14 10:18 ` Roman Zippel
2006-02-14 12:20 ` [patch] hrtimer: round up relative start time on low-res arches Ingo Molnar
2006-02-14 21:51 ` Thomas Gleixner
2006-02-15 0:30 ` Roman Zippel
2006-02-15 9:19 ` Ingo Molnar
2006-02-15 12:26 ` Roman Zippel
2006-02-15 20:43 ` john stultz [this message]
2006-02-16 14:10 ` Roman Zippel
2006-02-16 19:06 ` john stultz
2006-02-16 23:44 ` Roman Zippel
2006-02-17 0:28 ` john stultz
2006-02-17 15:02 ` Roman Zippel
2006-02-14 10:26 ` [PATCH 01/13] hrtimer: round up relative start time Thomas Gleixner
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=1140036234.27720.8.camel@leatherman \
--to=johnstul@us.ibm.com \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=zippel@linux-m68k.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