From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S965957AbXDBVk3 (ORCPT ); Mon, 2 Apr 2007 17:40:29 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S965961AbXDBVk3 (ORCPT ); Mon, 2 Apr 2007 17:40:29 -0400 Received: from 216-99-217-87.dsl.aracnet.com ([216.99.217.87]:51363 "EHLO sous-sol.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965957AbXDBVk2 (ORCPT ); Mon, 2 Apr 2007 17:40:28 -0400 Date: Mon, 2 Apr 2007 14:39:49 -0700 From: Chris Wright To: Thomas Gleixner Cc: Chris Wright , Ingo Molnar , john stultz , Andi Kleen , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/5] x86_64: enable clockevents and dynticks Message-ID: <20070402213949.GD10574@sequoia.sous-sol.org> References: <20070331083149.997762000@sous-sol.org> <1175419332.28263.67.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20070401185402.GZ10574@sequoia.sous-sol.org> <1175549504.28263.184.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1175549504.28263.184.camel@localhost.localdomain> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.2i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * Thomas Gleixner (tglx@linutronix.de) wrote: > On Sun, 2007-04-01 at 11:54 -0700, Chris Wright wrote: > > * Thomas Gleixner (tglx@linutronix.de) wrote: > > > On Sat, 2007-03-31 at 01:31 -0700, Chris Wright wrote: > > > > This series converts x86_64 timers to clockevents drivers > > > > and then enables dynticks. There's some minor cleanups along > > > > the way. The lapic broadcast mechanism is untested, I'm sure it > > > > still needs work, there's still some cruft in lapic_setup_timer. > > > > > > > > This is just for comments at this point, now that it's working > > > > on my test box in both NO_HZ=n and NO_HZ=n configurations (typically > > > > using hpet). > > > > > > Have you checked, if we could share the code between i386 and x86_64 at > > > least for PIT and HPET. I'm not sure about the local APIC, but I think > > > it might be doable as well. > > > > Yes, that's part of why I did some of the cleanups that way, so that we > > could merge the two together later. > > I'd prefer to get this done now. If we plug it in as is, the "merge > later" probably will never happen. that's fine, this is just RFC to see if there's obvious broken bits, etc. also, i still need to do some split out of the pit. it and hpet are nearly identical though, so i don't noticing any issues with this. the part i know is broken is lapic broadcast, so i'd like to fix that up too. trouble is, it's broken on vanilla too, so i'm not 100% sure what i'm debugging yet. thanks, -chris