Re: + clocksource-increase-initcall-priority.patch added to -mm tree

[Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>]

On Sun, 2006-10-08 at 14:31 -0700, Daniel Walker wrote:
> On Sun, 2006-10-08 at 23:20 +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > On Sun, 2006-10-08 at 14:15 -0700, Daniel Walker wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > Which one exactly? I'm not aware of a problem with the existing code at
> > > > all.
> > > 
> > > Clock shuffling.
> > 
> > What's the problem with that ? It replaces clocks. Where _is_ the
> > problem ?
> 
> The problem is that it's not optimal to have clocks switching furiously.
> This is something John notes as an issue in the unchanged
> kernel/time/clocksource.c file.

I don't see that behaviour on my machines and nobody complains about
that. I don't care about stale comments. Point me to a bug report
instead of your perception of what's optimal and not.

Working is not necessary optimal, but your vision of optimal is not
necessarily working either.

	tglx