Messages in this thread | ![/](/images/icornerl.gif) | | Date | Tue, 17 Jun 2003 17:46:09 -0700 | From | george anzinger <> | Subject | Re: [patch] input: Fix CLOCK_TICK_RATE usage ... [8/13] |
| |
Vojtech Pavlik wrote: > On Tue, Jun 17, 2003 at 11:21:13PM +0100, Russell King wrote: > > >>On Tue, Jun 17, 2003 at 11:11:46PM +0100, Riley Williams wrote: >> >>>On most architectures, the said timer runs at 1,193,181.818181818 Hz. >> >>Wow. That's more accurate than a highly expensive Caesium standard. >>And there's one inside most architectures? Wow, we're got a great >>deal there, haven't we? 8) > > > Well, it's unfortunately up to 400ppm off on most systems. Nevertheless > this is the 'official' frequency, actually it's a NTSC dotclock (14.3181818) > divided by 12. > > >>> > Please do not add CLOCK_TICK_RATE to the ia64 timex.h header file. >>> >>>It needs to be declared there. The only question is regarding the >>>value it is defined to, and it would have to be somebody with better >>>knowledge of the ia64 than me who decides that. All I can do is to >>>post a reasonable default until such decision is made. >> >>If this is the case, we have a dilema on ARM. CLOCK_TICK_RATE has >>been, and currently remains (at Georges distaste) a variable on >>some platforms. I shudder to think what this is doing to some of >>the maths in Georges new time keeping and timer code.
So do I :) > >
-- George Anzinger george@mvista.com High-res-timers: http://sourceforge.net/projects/high-res-timers/ Preemption patch: http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/rml
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| ![\](/images/icornerr.gif) |