From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To: John Stultz <john.stultz@linaro.org>
Cc: Miroslav Lichvar <mlichvar@redhat.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Richard Cochran <richardcochran@gmail.com>,
Prarit Bhargava <prarit@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] timekeeping: Improved NOHZ frequency steering (v2)
Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2014 08:59:07 +0200 (CEST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.10.1407160858260.24854@nanos> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <53C5F95E.6010300@linaro.org>
On Tue, 15 Jul 2014, John Stultz wrote:
> On 07/08/2014 04:08 AM, Miroslav Lichvar wrote:
> > On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 10:57:29AM -0700, John Stultz wrote:
> >> Another area we have to be careful with is there are still
> >> architectures (powerpc and ia64) which haven't switched from the old
> >> vsyscall rounding logic (CONFIG_GENERIC_TIME_VSYSCALL_OLD). In these
> >> cases we add up to 1ns of error each tick/update as we round up the
> >> sub-nanoseconds to ensure we don't see inconsistencies. If the
> >> adjustment logic can't handle this, I don't want to regress those
> >> arches.
> > I spent some time trying to figure out a workaround for the nanosecond
> > rounding, but I didn't find anything that wouldn't complicate the mult
> > adjustment logic and bring back the problems which the direct division
> > approach is supposed to solve.
> >
> > It seems it may be a while before the old vsyscalls are fixed. How
> > about including only the first two patches from this set for now?
>
> Hey! Sorry for the slow response here, I was on the road the last two weeks.
>
> So thanks for the ping here. If you're happy with the first two as an
> initial step, I'd be willing to try to push those in. The only trouble
> is there's a whole lot of timekeeping churn headed for 3.17 that Thomas
> has cooked up. While there isn't likely to be direct conflicts in the
> changes, I get nervous about mixing too many changes in subtle code at once.
>
> But maybe I'm being overly cautious?
>
> Thomas: Would you be ok if I push you some patches to improve ntp/ptp
> freq steering w/ NOHZ for this merge window as well? So far the patches
> have only shown nice improvements and no regressions, but its clearly
> subtle code, and there's a lot going on in this merge window.
I think it's ok. The steering is orthogonal to the other stuff cooking.
Thanks,
tglx
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-07-16 6:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-05-17 0:56 John Stultz
2014-05-17 0:56 ` [PATCH 1/3] [RFC] timekeeping: Rework frequency adjustments to work better w/ nohz John Stultz
2014-05-17 0:56 ` [PATCH 2/3] [RFC] timekeeping: Use cached ntp_tick_length when accumulating error John Stultz
2014-05-17 0:56 ` [PATCH 3/3] [RFC] timekeeping: Calculate freq adjustment directly John Stultz
2014-05-19 10:14 ` [PATCH 0/3] timekeeping: Improved NOHZ frequency steering (v2) Miroslav Lichvar
2014-05-19 17:57 ` John Stultz
2014-05-20 10:26 ` Miroslav Lichvar
2014-07-08 11:08 ` Miroslav Lichvar
2014-07-16 4:02 ` John Stultz
2014-07-16 6:59 ` Thomas Gleixner [this message]
2014-07-16 11:57 ` Miroslav Lichvar
2017-05-12 15:14 ` Miroslav Lichvar
2017-05-12 17:26 ` John Stultz
2017-05-17 15:03 ` Miroslav Lichvar
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=alpine.DEB.2.10.1407160858260.24854@nanos \
--to=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=john.stultz@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mlichvar@redhat.com \
--cc=prarit@redhat.com \
--cc=richardcochran@gmail.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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®