From: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>
To: Tim Deegan <tim@xen.org>
Cc: "Keir (Xen.org)" <keir@xen.org>, Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com>,
"xen-devel@lists.xen.org" <xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/watchdog: Use real timestamps for watchdog timeout
Date: Fri, 24 May 2013 15:29:34 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <519F794E.5050802@citrix.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130524135549.GA57961@ocelot.phlegethon.org>
On 24/05/13 14:55, Tim Deegan wrote:
> At 13:48 +0100 on 24 May (1369403327), Andrew Cooper wrote:
>> On 24/05/13 13:41, Tim Deegan wrote:
>>> Of those two, I prefer (1), just because it doesn't add any cost to the
>>> normal users of NOW().
>> I was not planning to make any requirement to change users of NOW().
> Well, you were planning to make NOW() slightly more expensive by needing
> to look up which of the banekd alternatives is valid. In any case, I
> think some sort of approximate version based on tsc will do.
>
> Tim.
I was planning to memcpy the shadow set over the main set as part of
calibration, leaving no alteration whatsoever to NOW().
An approximation from the TSC alone would be better so long as it is a
reasonable approximation. I am concerned about how accuate a dumb
approximation would be for non-stable TSCs etc.
~Andrew
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-05-24 14:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-05-23 20:32 [PATCH] x86/watchdog: Use real timestamps for watchdog timeout Andrew Cooper
2013-05-24 7:09 ` Jan Beulich
2013-05-24 9:57 ` Andrew Cooper
2013-05-24 10:13 ` Tim Deegan
2013-05-24 10:33 ` Andrew Cooper
2013-05-24 11:42 ` Jan Beulich
2013-05-24 12:00 ` Andrew Cooper
2013-05-24 13:11 ` Jan Beulich
2013-05-24 11:36 ` Jan Beulich
2013-05-24 12:41 ` Tim Deegan
2013-05-24 12:48 ` Andrew Cooper
2013-05-24 13:55 ` Tim Deegan
2013-05-24 14:29 ` Andrew Cooper [this message]
2013-05-24 17:10 ` Tim Deegan
2013-05-24 17:27 ` Andrew Cooper
2013-05-24 13:17 ` Jan Beulich
2013-05-24 14:01 ` Tim Deegan
2013-05-24 9:37 ` Tim Deegan
2013-05-24 10:03 ` Andrew Cooper
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=519F794E.5050802@citrix.com \
--to=andrew.cooper3@citrix.com \
--cc=JBeulich@suse.com \
--cc=keir@xen.org \
--cc=tim@xen.org \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xen.org \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).