From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To: Daniel Walker <dwalker@mvista.com>
Cc: akpm@osdl.org, johnstul@us.ibm.com, mingo@elte.hu,
zippel@linux-m68k.org, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: + clocksource-increase-initcall-priority.patch added to -mm tree
Date: Sun, 08 Oct 2006 22:52:02 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1160340722.5686.85.camel@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1160339986.3693.135.camel@c-67-180-230-165.hsd1.ca.comcast.net>
On Sun, 2006-10-08 at 13:39 -0700, Daniel Walker wrote:
> > The reason why this was delayed into late boot is simply that the
> > unstable, unsynchronized TSC's made way too much trouble and the pmtimer
> > can not be initialized early.
> >
> > I'm not going to accept that. Your change might work on 5 machines you
> > have tested on, but we start over with the same breakage we solved
> > already.
>
> Your going to have to explain the breakage further. I don't recall
> seeing any discussion on this.
See above, but I'm happy to copy it.
> > The reason why this was delayed into late boot is simply that the
> > unstable, unsynchronized TSC's made way too much trouble and the pmtimer
> > can not be initialized early.
I don't have the bug reports handy, but they are in the LKML archives.
> > This early boot instrumentation code can work with low resolution time
> > information quite well and none of the boot code does need any high res
> > time information. Boot code is different from a running system and has
> > different requirements.
> >
> > This is a solution for a nonexisting problem, which just brings back
> > already solved ones.
>
> There is at least one existing problem which it does solve.
Which one exactly? I'm not aware of a problem with the existing code at
all.
> How about we
> discuss the early TSC boot breakage, which you mention above, so I can
> properly fix this situation.
See above. Also it interferes probably with the highres/dyntick code, as
we might switch over way too early. Have not looked into that yet.
tglx
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-10-08 20:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <200610070153.k971ren4020838@shell0.pdx.osdl.net>
2006-10-08 8:06 ` + clocksource-increase-initcall-priority.patch added to -mm tree Thomas Gleixner
2006-10-08 10:19 ` Thomas Gleixner
2006-10-08 14:50 ` Daniel Walker
2006-10-08 14:53 ` Thomas Gleixner
2006-10-08 15:45 ` Daniel Walker
2006-10-08 15:58 ` Thomas Gleixner
2006-10-08 16:18 ` Daniel Walker
2006-10-08 16:52 ` Thomas Gleixner
2006-10-08 17:17 ` Daniel Walker
2006-10-08 19:03 ` Thomas Gleixner
2006-10-08 20:39 ` Daniel Walker
2006-10-08 20:52 ` Thomas Gleixner [this message]
2006-10-08 21:15 ` Daniel Walker
2006-10-08 21:20 ` Thomas Gleixner
2006-10-08 21:31 ` Daniel Walker
2006-10-08 21:38 ` Thomas Gleixner
2006-10-08 22:13 ` Daniel Walker
2006-10-08 22:53 ` Thomas Gleixner
2006-10-08 23:35 ` Daniel Walker
2006-10-09 6:56 ` 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=1160340722.5686.85.camel@localhost.localdomain \
--to=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=dwalker@mvista.com \
--cc=johnstul@us.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--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