From: Bill Gatliff <bgat@billgatliff.com>
To: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
vatsa@linux.vnet.ibm.com, efault@gmx.de,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Fwd: Commit 76a2a6ee8a0660a29127f05989ac59ae1ce865fa breaks PXA270 (at least)?
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2008 22:44:54 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <489286B6.20502@billgatliff.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080731215703.GA5392@flint.arm.linux.org.uk>
Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 31, 2008 at 11:47:55PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>> On Thu, 2008-07-31 at 23:37 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>>> * Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Tue, 29 Jul 2008 23:31:05 +0100
>>>> Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@arm.linux.org.uk> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> But then some bright spark thought it would be a good idea to get
>>>>> rid of printk_clock().
>>>> <does git-log, searches for printk_clock>
>>> i think this is a fresh regression via the introduction of
>>> kernel/sched_clock.c. We lost the (known) early-init behavior of
>>> cpu_clock() in the !UNSTABLE_SCHED_CLOCK case. The fix would be to
>>> restore that, not to reintroduce printk_clock().
>>>
>>> Peter, any ideas?
>> How about something like this, it builds an atificial delay, exactly
>> like we already have for the HAVE_UNSTABLE_SCHED_CLOCK case.
>>
>> This keeps cpu_clock() 0 until after sched_clock_init().
>>
>> Russell, Bill, is this sufficient?
>
> It looks like it should. Bill - can you test the patch in Peter's mail
> please?
I've got one foot out the door headed towards a business trip. I can check it
out Monday or Tuesday.
b.g.
--
Bill Gatliff
bgat@billgatliff.com
prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-08-01 3:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-07-29 22:31 Fwd: Commit 76a2a6ee8a0660a29127f05989ac59ae1ce865fa breaks PXA270 (at least)? Russell King - ARM Linux
2008-07-29 22:46 ` Andrew Morton
2008-07-29 22:56 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2008-07-30 7:10 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-07-30 7:55 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-07-30 8:00 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2008-07-30 12:26 ` Bill Gatliff
2008-07-30 12:54 ` Bill Gatliff
2008-07-31 21:37 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-07-31 21:47 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-07-31 21:57 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2008-08-01 3:44 ` Bill Gatliff [this message]
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=489286B6.20502@billgatliff.com \
--to=bgat@billgatliff.com \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=efault@gmx.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@arm.linux.org.uk \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=vatsa@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
/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