mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To: Paul Mundt <lethal@linux-sh.org>
Cc: john stultz <johnstul@us.ibm.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Linus Walleij <linus.ml.walleij@gmail.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, Andrew Victor <linux@maxim.org.za>,
	Haavard Skinnemoen <hskinnemoen@atmel.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-sh@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.arm.linux.org.uk,
	John Stultz <johnstul@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched: Support current clocksource handling in fallback sched_clock().
Date: Wed, 27 May 2009 02:18:40 +0200 (CEST)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.00.0905270206300.1762@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090526234425.GB6295@linux-sh.org>

On Wed, 27 May 2009, Paul Mundt wrote:
> > Yea. So this is a little better. There's still a few other issues to
> > consider:
> > 
> > 1) What if a clocksource is registered that has the _SCHED_CLOCK bit
> > set, but is not selected for timekeeping due it being unstable like the
> > TSC?
> > 
> See, this is what I thought the rating information was useful for, as the
> rating is subsequently dropped if it is not usable. But perhaps it makes
> more sense to just clear the bit at the same time that the rating is
> lowered once it turns out to be unstable.

Stop worrying about TSC please. The x86 f*cked up timers need special
handling which is definitely not required for most of arch/*. x86
overrides that anyway and handles the TSC f*ckup in the
CONFIG_HAVE_UNSTABLE_SCHED_CLOCK section of sched_clock.c which is
completely irrelevant to any architecture which has a sane set of
timers.

The only extra magic which is required to avoid that (sub)arch
maintainers need to specify a sched_clock() implementation to override
the weak generic one is really the simple

    if (clock && (clock->flags & CLOCKSOURCE_USE_FOR_SCHED_CLOCK))
       return ....

We need no locking there at all.

We have a workaround in place, which overrides the weak sched_clock()
implementation, to make x86 efficient, so why do we want to impose all
that x86 crap on folks which deal with architectures which got the
timers right ?

Thanks,

	tglx

  reply	other threads:[~2009-05-27  0:22 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 57+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-05-26  6:15 Paul Mundt
2009-05-26 14:31 ` Linus Walleij
2009-05-26 14:38   ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-05-26 20:17     ` Thomas Gleixner
2009-05-26 23:08       ` Paul Mundt
2009-05-26 23:13         ` Paul Mundt
2009-05-26 23:25         ` john stultz
2009-05-26 23:44           ` Paul Mundt
2009-05-27  0:18             ` Thomas Gleixner [this message]
2009-05-27  0:22             ` john stultz
2009-05-27  0:26               ` Paul Mundt
2009-05-27  1:09                 ` john stultz
2009-05-27  0:27               ` Thomas Gleixner
2009-05-26 23:49         ` Thomas Gleixner
2009-05-27  0:15           ` Paul Mundt
2009-05-27 16:25             ` Daniel Walker
2009-05-28  8:44               ` Paul Mundt
2009-05-28  9:19               ` Paul Mundt
2009-05-28  9:34                 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-05-28 11:09                   ` Paul Mundt
2009-05-28 12:22                     ` Thomas Gleixner
2009-05-28 12:40                       ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-05-28 12:42                       ` Paul Mundt
2009-05-28 12:53                         ` Thomas Gleixner
2009-05-28 12:59                         ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-05-28 13:20                           ` Paul Mundt
2009-05-28 16:13                           ` Daniel Walker
2009-05-28 16:32                             ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-05-28 16:40                               ` Paul Mundt
2009-05-28 16:52                                 ` Daniel Walker
2009-05-28 16:58                                   ` Paul Mundt
2009-05-28 17:38                                     ` Daniel Walker
2009-05-28 17:46                                       ` Thomas Gleixner
2009-05-28 17:53                                       ` Paul Mundt
2009-05-28 18:10                                         ` Daniel Walker
2009-05-28 18:27                                           ` Paul Mundt
2009-05-28 19:04                                             ` Daniel Walker
2009-05-28 19:34                                               ` Paul Mundt
2009-05-28 19:41                                                 ` Daniel Walker
2009-05-28 23:37                                                   ` Paul Mundt
2009-05-28 18:44                                           ` Thomas Gleixner
2009-05-28 17:00                                   ` Thomas Gleixner
2009-05-28 17:07                                 ` John Stultz
2009-05-26 20:23     ` john stultz
2009-05-26 20:30       ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-05-26 20:40         ` john stultz
2009-05-26 20:55           ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-05-26 23:00             ` john stultz
2009-05-26 23:24               ` Mangalampalli, JayantX
2009-05-27  0:04                 ` Thomas Gleixner
2009-05-26 23:39               ` Thomas Gleixner
2009-05-27  6:58               ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-05-26 20:39       ` Thomas Gleixner
2009-05-26 14:43   ` Paul Mundt
2009-05-26 14:50     ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-05-26 14:53       ` Paul Mundt
2009-05-26 15:02   ` Matthieu CASTET

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.LFD.2.00.0905270206300.1762@localhost.localdomain \
    --to=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=hskinnemoen@atmel.com \
    --cc=johnstul@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=johnstul@us.ibm.com \
    --cc=lethal@linux-sh.org \
    --cc=linus.ml.walleij@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.arm.linux.org.uk \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-sh@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux@maxim.org.za \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.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

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®