From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S934677AbdCWSk5 (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Mar 2017 14:40:57 -0400 Received: from Galois.linutronix.de ([146.0.238.70]:34409 "EHLO Galois.linutronix.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756248AbdCWSkz (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Mar 2017 14:40:55 -0400 Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2017 19:40:47 +0100 (CET) From: Thomas Gleixner To: Pasha Tatashin cc: Peter Zijlstra , x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mingo@redhat.com, hpa@zytor.com Subject: Re: [v1 0/9] Early boot time stamps for x86 In-Reply-To: <0a628969-e4f6-a463-04e5-889e7b423602@oracle.com> Message-ID: References: <1490214265-899964-1-git-send-email-pasha.tatashin@oracle.com> <20170322202807.y34mrortprg5pi43@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> <0a628969-e4f6-a463-04e5-889e7b423602@oracle.com> User-Agent: Alpine 2.20 (DEB 67 2015-01-07) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 23 Mar 2017, Pasha Tatashin wrote: > I will add a condition to tsc_early_init() to check for TSC_ADJUST if it is > not 0, disable early TSC feature. Does this sound OK? Not really. I have strong objections against how this is crammed into the early boot process along with the code duplication and the extra magic which is caused by this. The early boot process is fragile enough, so we really only want to have code there which is absolutely required. That timestamp feature does not qualify for that at all. I need some quiet time to look into that, so please don't waste too much time on refactoring that patch set. Thanks, tglx