From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
To: Rene Herman <rene.herman@keyaccess.nl>
Cc: "David P. Reed" <dpreed@reed.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
Dmitry Torokhov <dtor_core@ameritech.net>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: use explicit timing delay for pit accesses in kernel and pcspkr driver
Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2008 14:43:10 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <47BA09FE.50507@zytor.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <47BA0188.6000808@keyaccess.nl>
Rene Herman wrote:
>>
>> Uhm, I'm not sure I believe that's safe.
>>
>> The PIT is particularly pissy in this case -- the semantics of the PIT
>> are ill-defined if there hasn't been a PIT clock between two adjacent
>> accesses, so I fully expect that there are chipsets out there which
>> will do very bad things in this case.
>
> Okay. Now that they're isolated, do you have a suggestion for
> {in,out}b_pit? You say a PIT clock, so do you think we can bounce of the
> PIT iself in this case after all?
No, I don't think so.
-hpa
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-02-18 22:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-02-18 18:58 [PATCH] x86: use explicit timing delay for pit accesses in kernel and pcspkr driver David P. Reed
2008-02-18 20:17 ` Alan Cox
2008-02-18 20:38 ` Rene Herman
2008-02-18 20:43 ` H. Peter Anvin
2008-02-18 21:04 ` Rene Herman
2008-02-18 21:05 ` Rene Herman
2008-02-18 21:44 ` H. Peter Anvin
2008-02-18 21:59 ` Rene Herman
2008-02-18 22:01 ` H. Peter Anvin
2008-02-18 22:07 ` Rene Herman
2008-02-18 22:32 ` Rene Herman
2008-02-18 22:44 ` H. Peter Anvin
2008-02-20 12:06 ` Rene Herman
2008-02-20 17:05 ` H. Peter Anvin
2008-02-20 17:09 ` Rene Herman
2008-02-20 20:13 ` [linux-kernel] " David P. Reed
2008-02-21 6:21 ` Rene Herman
2008-02-18 22:43 ` H. Peter Anvin [this message]
2008-02-19 9:46 ` Ingo Molnar
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=47BA09FE.50507@zytor.com \
--to=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
--cc=dpreed@reed.com \
--cc=dtor_core@ameritech.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=rene.herman@keyaccess.nl \
--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