From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>
Cc: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
John Stultz <john.stultz@linaro.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Richard Cochran <richardcochran@gmail.com>,
Prarit Bhargava <prarit@redhat.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, lttng-dev@lists.lttng.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] Introduce timekeeper latch synchronization
Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2013 09:31:56 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130913073156.GF31370@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130913025253.GA17218@Krystal>
On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 10:52:53PM -0400, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> OK! Here is the full implementation of the idea against Linux
> timekeeper, ntp, and PPS. It appears that ntp and PPS were relying on
> the timekeeper seqlock too. And guess what, after booting my laptop with
> this kernel there still no smoke coming out of it after a good 5 minutes
> of testing. ;-)
>
> Comments are welcome.
I think that moving stuff into structures is a worthwhile change on its
own, but I'll leave John and Thomas to decide on all that.
The latch thing does make the update side slightly more expensive due to
having to do that copy every time, but ideally that wouldn't happen all
that often.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-09-13 7:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-09-13 2:52 [RFC PATCH] Introduce timekeeper latch synchronization Mathieu Desnoyers
2013-09-13 7:31 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2013-09-13 15:30 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2013-09-13 19:20 ` John Stultz
2013-09-14 1:18 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2013-09-13 16:13 ` Thomas Gleixner
2013-09-13 17:05 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2013-09-13 17:41 ` John Stultz
2013-09-13 18:20 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2013-09-13 18:28 ` John Stultz
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=20130913073156.GF31370@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=john.stultz@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lttng-dev@lists.lttng.org \
--cc=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=prarit@redhat.com \
--cc=richardcochran@gmail.com \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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