public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: john stultz <johnstul@us.ibm.com>
To: linux@horizon.com
Cc: zippel@linux-m68k.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, theotso@us.ibm.com
Subject: Re: Linux time code
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2006 12:23:05 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1156879386.7748.4.camel@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20060829032829.28776.qmail@science.horizon.com>

On Mon, 2006-08-28 at 23:28 -0400, linux@horizon.com wrote:
> > With the new clocksource code, we can (currently just i386, but the
> > architecture is generic and I'm working on the other arches) make use of
> > continuous clocksources for accumulating time instead of having the deal
> > with the problematic PIT (as well as the lost ticks issue).
> 
> If it's there, it's great, but what about i386EX embedded boards and
> the like?

The PIT clocksource is available for those situations, but is one of the
lowest rated clocksources, so anything else will be used if its
available.

>   It's approximately manageable on uniprocessor, but can
> I be sure there's always something (what?) better than the PIT on
> *every* SMP system?

Yea. With the exception of NUMAQ almost every i386 SMP system either can
use the TSC or has an alternative clocksource (acpi pm, hpet, cyclone).


> I need to study what you've done and see how to use it.

Let me know if you have any questions or thoughts about it.

thanks
-john



  parent reply	other threads:[~2006-08-29 19:23 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2006-08-23  6:25 Linux time code linux
2006-08-23 18:29 ` john stultz
2006-08-24  2:35   ` linux
2006-08-28 11:39     ` Roman Zippel
2006-08-28 22:36       ` john stultz
2006-08-29  3:28         ` linux
2006-08-29 13:15           ` Theodore Tso
2006-08-29 15:18             ` linux
2006-08-29 19:23           ` john stultz [this message]
2006-08-29 14:43         ` Roman Zippel
2006-08-26  0:17   ` linux
2006-08-28 22:41     ` john stultz
2006-08-26  3:46   ` linux
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2006-08-16 12:26 Ulrich Windl
2006-08-16 12:36 ` Oleg Verych
2006-08-16 15:35   ` H. Peter Anvin
2006-08-16 15:12     ` Oleg Verych
2006-08-16 19:53 ` john stultz
2006-08-17  7:20   ` Ulrich Windl
2006-08-17 19:15     ` john stultz
2006-08-17 11:43   ` Roman Zippel
2006-08-17 21:58     ` john stultz
2006-08-17 22:11       ` Jesse Barnes
2006-08-17 22:32         ` john stultz
2006-08-17 22:50           ` Jesse Barnes
2006-08-17 23:02             ` john stultz
2006-08-20 17:14               ` Roman Zippel
2006-08-20 17:10       ` Roman Zippel

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=1156879386.7748.4.camel@localhost \
    --to=johnstul@us.ibm.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux@horizon.com \
    --cc=theotso@us.ibm.com \
    --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