From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, tglx@linutronix.de,
linux-tip-commits@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [tip:perf/core] perf/x86: Clean up cap_user_time* setting
Date: Mon, 07 Oct 2013 10:22:06 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5252EDBE.7030805@zytor.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20131006091054.GA4342@gmail.com>
On 10/06/2013 02:10 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>>
>> I'm wanting to hear from the x86 people on why we have this absurd knob
>> to begin with; but I'm tempted to simply disable all of perf if you
>> touch it.
>
> I'm fully with you, please zap the 'notsc' boot option - it's an ancient
> relic, if any box is still broken with the TSC on we want to hear about it
> and fix it!
>
Perhaps better would be to make the notsc option do what other feature
removal options do and just remove the CPU feature flag.
Early on we had a bunch of ad hoc behaviors for feature disabling. They
are harmful and just wrong... "not present" and "disabled" should be the
same thing in 99% of all cases (in the case of the TSC one may wish to
set the CR4 bit which disables the TSC from userspace, but I don't think
"notsc" ever did that.)
However:
pr_warn("Kernel compiled with CONFIG_X86_TSC, cannot disable TSC
completely\n");
That is a total "say what"?
At one point it even said:
printk(KERN_WARNING "notsc: Kernel compiled with CONFIG_X86_TSC, "
"cannot disable TSC.\n");
CONFIG_X86_TSC is a baseline control option; we shouldn't key
functionality off of it. It's fine to say notsc -> no tracing, but
making it a compile-time key makes me a bit uphappy. We cut off 386,
but cutting of 486 at this point makes me nervous.
-hpa
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-10-07 17:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-10-04 17:31 [tip:perf/core] perf/x86: Clean up cap_user_time* setting tip-bot for Peter Zijlstra
2013-10-04 18:31 ` Adrian Hunter
2013-10-04 18:55 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-10-06 9:10 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-10-07 9:33 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-10-07 15:59 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-10-07 17:22 ` H. Peter Anvin [this message]
2013-10-07 17:40 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-10-07 18:30 ` H. Peter Anvin
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=5252EDBE.7030805@zytor.com \
--to=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=adrian.hunter@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-tip-commits@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.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